1. The Defendant’s disposition of refusal to grant permission to the Plaintiff on August 31, 2016 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

On June 8, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission with the Defendant for electricity business with the following details, in order to build power plants using solid fuels (Slouse Fuel, packing plastics, etc. of foodstuffs) which are new and renewable energy.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant electric generation business”); 1. The type of the business: the electric generation business;

2. Place: The Hongsan-si, Hongsan-si, Do, Chungcheongnam-do and two parcels outside of 59-1.

3. Matters concerning electrical facilities for the electricity business;

(a) Original power: New and renewable energy;

(b) Equipment capacity: 9.9M;

C. Supply voltage: on August 31, 2016, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for permission on the electric utility business on the ground that “The financial ability and technical ability, etc. for the promotion of the power generation project meet the standards for permission on the electric utility business, but it is deemed difficult to implement the project in light of the situation of the local government and the residents’ extreme opposition.”

(2) Article 7(3)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Electric Utility Act provides that “The level of acceptance of an area planned for the construction of electric facilities shall be high” as the criteria for the examination of the capacity to implement the business, which is one of the criteria for the permission for the electric utility business, shall be set forth in Article 7(3)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Electric Utility Act. This shall be interpreted to have high degree of acceptance of the electricity produced from electric facilities in the relevant area. Thus, the opposition by the local government and local residents having jurisdiction over the electric utility generation business of this case shall be considered the criteria for the examination.

Therefore, the disposition of this case is unlawful because it rejected the plaintiff's application for permission for the electrical business on the ground that it is not prescribed by the Electric Utility Act.

The defendant shall accept the standard of the above examination from the time of entry of the power generation facilities.