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

A. On May 16, 2012, the Plaintiff is running a construction business until now by changing the trade name to A on May 18, 2012, with the trade name that is a stock company B (type of business: construction business and registration number: C) and a stock company on May 18, 2012.

B. On September 27, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) with Nonparty D, Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, and E and F, one unit of multi-family housing (urban residential housing and neighboring facilities) with a total floor area of 1,459.8 square meters on the ground (hereinafter “instant building”) by setting the construction cost of 2,620,00,000, and the construction period from October 10, 2012 to October 10, 2013 (hereinafter “instant construction”). Thereafter, the Plaintiff commenced the instant construction work on October 10, 2012 and completed the construction on October 10, 2013.

C. On the other hand, on August 4, 2014, Nonparty G, the representative of the Plaintiff, received a summary order of KRW 3 million for criminal facts that: “Around September 27, 2012, at the Plaintiff’s office located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H and 10th, received an amount of money from D without a construction business license, and let the said D perform the instant construction project using the Plaintiff’s trade name.” D also received a summary order of KRW 3 million for the above criminal facts (hereinafter “instant summary order”); and D also received a summary order of KRW 3 million for the said criminal facts (hereinafter “instant summary order”); and the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014 High Court Decision 4984”) and D and D did not request formal trial, and thus, the said summary order became final and conclusive as it is.

On October 13, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition to cancel the Plaintiff’s registration of construction business as of November 5, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by applying Article 83 Subparag. 5 and Article 21(1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, on the ground that the Plaintiff lent the Plaintiff’s registration certificate of construction business to D in relation to the instant construction project.

E. On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed to the instant disposition and filed the instant lawsuit.

Grounds for recognition: Facts without dispute;