1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 19, 2013, the Plaintiff planned to newly construct a mercin breeding shed in Go Chang-gun B and C. With respect to the construction work, the Plaintiff obtained approval for use of agricultural infrastructure for a purpose other than the purpose of using 102 square meters among 2859 square meters and 13 square meters among 314 square meters of land for a 2859 square meters adjacent to the said newly constructed site, which is an agricultural infrastructure located in the said newly constructed site. The conditions for the approval are as follows.

The purpose of use: The conditions for obtaining access roads for collection of earth and rocks from June 2013 to June 30, 2014: It shall be used to the extent that such use does not interfere with the entry into or exit into surrounding farmland.

B. On June 30, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained a building permit from the Defendant and implemented a new construction project. In this regard, neighboring village residents filed a counterclaim against the Defendant.

C. On October 8, 2013, the Defendant rendered a disposition to suspend the use of agricultural infrastructure for any purpose other than the purpose of agricultural infrastructure on the ground that the Plaintiff used the agricultural infrastructure in excess of the area approved as above, and that there was a cause for revocation of approval, in violation of the conditions of approval that the agricultural infrastructure should be used immediately after the immediate settlement, due to the occupancy of the farm road. On October 10, 2013, the Defendant issued a disposition to temporarily suspend construction works on the ground that it violated the content that the resident petition

The Plaintiff asserted that the portion exceeding the area of the agricultural infrastructure that was approved was restored to its original state, and the former North Korean Administrative Appeals Commission filed an administrative appeal with the former North Korean Administrative Appeals Commission on December 24, 2013, and the former North Korean Administrative Appeals Commission rendered each of the above dispositions on the ground that “The conditions of approval under precedents are proportional and equal, and thus, should conform to the principle of proportionality, and that it is unlawful to resolve all civil petitions including unfair civil petitions, regardless of whether they are illegal as against the principle of proportionality and equality.”