1. The Defendant’s disposition of non-permission to file an application for building permission with the Plaintiff on March 11, 2019 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 5, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit to construct a Class 2 neighborhood living facility (hereinafter “instant building”) with a total floor area of 491.4m2m2 on one floor of a building, the main purpose of which is a religious assembly site (hereinafter “instant building”) with respect to 2,768m2,768m2 in Busan-gun, Busan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On March 11, 2019, the Defendant held a comprehensive council for complex civil petitions as stipulated under Article 12(1) of the Building Act, and accordingly, rejected the Plaintiff’s application for the said building permit (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the following grounds.

Reasons for non-taxation

1. As a result of consultation with the relevant department on an application for a building permit, it is judged that all members of the site for which an application is filed are judged to have high conservation value as they actually form a forest with good forest condition, and where buildings and structures are installed due to development activities as a natural green-belt on the special-purpose area, it is highly likely to damage the surrounding environment and scenery;

2. The criteria for permission for development activities under Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 22 of the Busan Metropolitan City Ordinance on Urban Planning and Urban Planning, and “request for cooperation for the efficient utilization of land and the prevention of subfertility development” are not subject to permission for development activities, and thus, the permission for development is not subject to a disposition not subject to permission for development. [Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, the entries in Gap 1, 3, and Eul 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case should be revoked inasmuch as it violates the principle of proportionality and equality as follows and thus deviates from and abused discretion.

The trees planted on the instant land have lost their protected values in light of their composition and status, and the surrounding areas of the instant land are Class I district unit planning zones.