According to the judgment of the court below, the order issued by the head of Seongdong-gu with respect to the building without permission of this case by the defendant was revoked by the judgment in the administrative litigation on the ground that it was an illegal disposition that does not meet the requirements under Article 2 of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act, and the building of this case was removed by the vicarious execution by the head of the above Gu on the basis of the mooring disposition of the problem, but the court below held that a series of acts leading to the removal cannot be said to be due to the conditions of the liability of the head

However, it should be presumed that the damages caused by the destruction of the house by the vicarious execution on the basis of the guidance taken by the illegal abortion due to the failure to meet the requirements, would have been caused by the liability conditions of the above head of the Gu, who is the subject of the vicarious administrative execution, barring any special circumstances. Therefore, the judgment of the court below in the light of the reasoning that the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the subjective requirements of the tort, which is the subjective requirements of the tort, thereby falling into the lack of reason, and that the judgment

Therefore, this decision is delivered with the assent of all Justices.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Marins (Presiding Judge) of the Republic of Korea