1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 12, 2010, the Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid in the voluntary auction procedure for D-ground factories located in the general industrial complex B B (hereinafter “instant factory”). On March 29, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for occupancy of a C-General Industrial Complex with regard to the instant factory as type of business “manufacturing”, classification number “13409”, “bridge”, and “products” (hereinafter “instant occupancy contract”), and operated a business after changing the name of the factory registration to the Plaintiff.

The main contents of the occupancy contract of this case are as follows.

Article 2 (Amendment to Terms and Conditions of Occupancy Contract) The plaintiff is only "the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act", among the terms and conditions of occupancy contract.

(1) In the event that the Plaintiff falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the Defendant shall order the correction thereof, and the occupancy contract may be terminated in the event that the Plaintiff fails to comply therewith.

1. Where a cause for termination of occupancy contract under Article 42 of the Act has occurred;

2. Where the terms of this contract for occupancy have been breached, matters not specified in this contract under Article 12 (Relation with other Provisions) shall be governed by the Act, guidelines for management of industrial complexes, other related provisions, and the occupancy contract provisions prescribed by the

B. On March 28, 2014, the Defendant issued a corrective order for six months pursuant to Article 42 of the Act and notified that the occupancy contract of this case may be terminated if the Defendant did not comply with the corrective order by September 30, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff violated Article 38(2) of the Act by operating laundry business, which is not a type of business reported by the Plaintiff when the occupancy contract of this case was concluded.

C. The Plaintiff did not comply with the above corrective order, and the Defendant, on June 30, 2016, terminated the instant occupancy contract with the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 38(2) and 42 of the Act.