1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs incurred by participation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed each application with the Defendant for permission to divert farmland and permission to engage in development activities (hereinafter “each of the instant applications”) to install solar power infrastructure and access roads to the said facilities on the ground (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On November 5, 2015, the Defendant presented a proposal for deliberation on development activities to the Full Gun Urban Planning Committee (hereinafter “Urban Planning Committee”), and the Urban Planning Committee requested the Plaintiff to supplement the following five items:

(1) In cases of D (hereinafter referred to as "D"), consultation with the landowner is required due to restrictions on the use of the land surrounded by the site for solar-powered facilities, and in cases where consultation is not possible, E or C shall be excluded from the main project site.

C. Although the Plaintiff submitted complementary matters to the Urban Planning Committee, on March 18, 2016, as a result of the on-site verification of the instant land, the Urban Planning Committee rejected the deliberation on the development activities for solar power infrastructure on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff, among the above complementary matters, failed to comply with the above supplementary requirements; (b) as a result, in the case of D, the posting of solar power plates is likely to cause damage due to the increase in the number of times, without the circulation surrounded by the project site; and (c) as a plan to cut the relevant development activities, there is a risk of causing danger due to the soil erosion and damage to the landscape of natural villages in the event

On March 29, 2016, the defendant is the Doi-gun Urban Planning Committee.