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

In around 2011, the Plaintiff, without permission, installed and used a vinyl of a size of 1,575 square meters on the ground of 911 square meters in the Yanam-gun, Youngnam-gun, the Plaintiff installed a concrete retaining wall (hereinafter “the instant vinyl”) on the wall. On April 24, 2014, the Plaintiff reported a temporary building to the Defendant and newly constructed and used a temporary building of a size of 980 square meters on the ground of 912-13, the Plaintiff installed a retaining wall (hereinafter “the instant temporary building”) on the wall, which is located a concrete retaining wall on the wall (hereinafter “the instant temporary building”; and, in addition to the instant vinyl, “each of the instant buildings”).

On April 6, 2015, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to voluntarily remove each of the instant buildings until April 30, 2015 on the ground that each of the instant buildings is an unlawful building, and at the same time ordered the Plaintiff to voluntarily remove each of the instant buildings within the given period, the Defendant issued a warning to the effect that the instant buildings will be vicariously executed if the instant buildings are not voluntarily removed within the given period.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition” only for the said part (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”), / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Eul’s entry of No. 12-1, Plaintiff’s assertion of the entire argument, and Plaintiff’s assertion of relevant laws and regulations, must be revoked for the following reasons.

In violation of the principle of trust protection, the public official belonging to the defendant did not mention that each of the buildings of this case conflicts with the Building Act although he knew that retaining walls were installed in each of the buildings of this case, and rather, until May 2014, he promised to train each of the buildings of this case to the plaintiff, and demanded the approval of use and purchase of each of the building sites of this case, permission for development and environmental impact assessment.

The plaintiff trusted the defendant's implied and training commitment as above and invested a considerable amount of money for a long time in each of the buildings of this case. The disposition of this case is above.