Plaintiff

The claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that engages in the production, distribution, sales, etc. of agricultural products by constructing mushroom cultivation plants from Gohap-gun, B, and one parcel.

B. On September 18, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit (including permission, etc. for development activities (such as changing the form and quality of land) deemed to be a building permit) to build 4,157.6 square meters of a building area on the 7,001 square meters of a 7,001 square meters of a building area among the 7,00-gun B and 4 lots outside the Gohap-gun (hereinafter “instant application site”; “the instant stable”; and “the instant application”; Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Article 56 of the same Act, and attached Table 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, which does not meet the criteria for permission for development activities non-permission, but does not need to be preserved on the ground that it does not constitute a group of land, such as birds and water trees

(a) There is a high-quality farmland worthy of conservation due to the adjustment of land and the maintenance of production infrastructure. (b) The farmland in a grouped farmland is likely to be sericultural due to the chain of permission for nearby farmland due to the chain of permission;

The building permit of farmland in the neighborhood is likely to impair the agricultural management environment of nearby farmland.

On December 31, 2019, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition to the Plaintiff on the following grounds (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the administrative appeals commission seeking the revocation of the disposition of this case, however, on April 27, 2020, the appeal was dismissed.

[Grounds for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-4, 9, 10, Eul 1, and the whole purport of the arguments

2. On the grounds delineated below, the instant disposition was an abuse of discretion due to a mistake of fact, violation of the principle of proportionality, etc., for which the grounds for the instant disposition cannot be recognized.

① The filing of the instant application is located at the edge of neighboring farmland, the road is abutting on the road, and part of the land is already installed and operated by the mushroom cultivation shed.