1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 2017, the Plaintiff applied for permission to engage in development activities for the purpose of creating a site for Class I neighborhood living facilities (retail stores) and Class II neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant business”) (hereinafter “instant application”) (hereinafter “instant application”) to the Defendant, on the grounds that each of the said lands is specified as Dong and multiple times, and that the total of them is “the instant application site” (hereinafter “instant application”).

B. On October 19, 2017, the Defendant rendered a non-permission disposition regarding the instant application (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) on the following grounds to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Grounds for Non-permission

(a)the applied place is a natural green area adjacent to the boundary of the F Housing Site Development Zone and has excellent clinical trees connected to neighboring parks and ecological corridors, etc. under the F Housing Site Development Zone development plan and needs to be preserved for the protection of the pleasant residential environment of residents, the securing of green space and the protection of natural scenery;

(b)the natural damage and cutting of green area is inevitable due to the development activities concerned, and it is likely to harm the natural landscape of the surrounding environment.

C. Therefore, Article 58(1)4 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and attached Table 1-2A of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Standards for Permission for Development Acts).

Sector:

D. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission on February 19, 2018, which did not comply with the provisions of the relevant provisions and rejected an application for development activities (or change of land form and quality). C. The Plaintiff rejected the Plaintiff’s appeal on February 19, 2018. The Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal. The Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul’s evidence No. 1, and Eul’s each statement