1. The Defendant’s KRW 311,235,951 as well as 5% per annum from October 19, 2015 to December 13, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4 through 10, and 16 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply);

(ii) each entry in Category B(1) through (6) and the purport of the whole pleading

A. The Plaintiff is a company that had been engaged in concrete manufacturing business from around September 2009 at the former-nam D ground factory located in C-Industrial Complex (hereinafter “instant factory”). The Defendant’s representative B head is the authorized administrator and management agency of C-Industrial Complex under Article 30(1)3 and 30(2)1 of the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act (hereinafter “Industrial Cluster Act”).

B. On April 16, 2015, the Plaintiff, at the time of the instant factory pursuant to Article 13(1) of the Industrial Cluster Development Act, was at least 50 square meters of the factory construction area of the instant factory to the head of B/Gun.

On April 30, 2015, the head of B filed an application for approval of change of the type of factory to add ready-mixed manufacturing business, and the head of B notified the approval of change of the type of factory (hereinafter “instant approval”) on the condition that waste ready-mixed recycling facilities are installed.

C. On July 23, 2015, after the construction of the above recycling facility, the Plaintiff filed a report on the completion under Article 15(1) of the Industrial Cluster Act, and the head of B/Gun completed the registration of the alteration of a factory under Article 16(1) of the Industrial Cluster Act after accepting the above report on July 24, 2015.

However, since August 2015, neighboring residents filed a civil petition to revoke the approval of the instant case from around August 2015, public officials belonging to the Defendant’s planning and budget room in the head of the Gun on September 25, 2015, when the Plaintiff operated the instant factory, committed illegal acts, such as illegal expansion, expansion and use of the site area, and unauthorized disposal of construction materials, and the competent department should take measures against such illegal acts, and it is reasonable to revoke the approval of the instant case ex officio in consideration of the Plaintiff’s violation of the above statutes, the inconvenience of neighboring residents, the economic feasibility of the C-Industrial Complex, and the risk of manufacturing ready-mixed materials. B head of the Gun ordered the revocation of legal advice.