1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is the owner of the land in this case where the land in this case is combined with the land in this case, and the land in this case is 2,551 square meters prior to Daejeon Seo-gu, Daejeon, and 1,420 square meters prior to C, and 298 square meters of D forest land.

All of the forests of this case are designated as development restriction zones under the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Development Restriction Zones Act”).

The Plaintiff has cultivated the forest land of this case as farmland without going through lawful procedures after the forest land of this case was designated as a development restriction zone.

Meanwhile, as of December 1, 2010, the Addenda to the Management of Mountainous Districts Act (amended by May 31, 2010) enacted a temporary special provision on illegal mountainous districts where a person who uses or manages a mountainous district for a certain purpose for at least five years without undergoing due process as of December 1, 2010, reports to the head of a Si/Gun/Gu within one year from December 1, 2010, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu made a temporary special provision on illegal mountainous districts so that the head of a Si/Gun/Gu can take necessary measures for land category change, such as permission for mountainous district conversion (hereinafter “the

On March 3, 2011, the Plaintiff asked the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (hereinafter “the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs”), “The Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs” (hereinafter “Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs”) of whether the special provisions of this case apply to illegal exclusive mountainous areas located within development-restricted areas.

On April 25, 201, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs does not exclude the application of the special provisions of this case solely on the ground that it is an illegal exclusive mountainous district located within a development-restricted zone. However, in order to apply the special provisions of this case to an illegal exclusive mountainous district located within a development-restricted zone, consultation with the head of the relevant administrative agency pursuant to paragraph (4) of the special provisions of this case, and comply with the criteria for permission as a result of the examination by the head of the relevant Si/Gun/Gu, apart from whether