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

A. The Plaintiff leased the building B in Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) from C and three other co-owners (hereinafter “Lessors”), and operated the restaurant in the name of “D” in the instant building (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

B. From August 6, 2012 to August 7, 2015, the Defendant imposed indemnity of KRW 42,167,300 (hereinafter “previous Disposition”) on July 14, 2016 on the following grounds: (a) the lessor owned an unauthorized building (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) constructed on the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant road”) and occupied the instant road; (b) the lessor owned an unauthorized building (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) and occupied the instant road.

C. The lessor appealed and filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the previous disposition with the Seoul Administrative Court 2017Gudan56295. The above court held that “the owner of the building without permission of this case is not the lessor but the Plaintiff. Therefore, the previous disposition for the reason that the lessor is the owner is unlawful.

"The previous disposition was revoked for this reason, and the above judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

Accordingly, on February 13, 2018, the Defendant imposed KRW 36,026,50 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied the instant road from February 13, 2013 to August 7, 2015 without obtaining permission to occupy and use the relevant unauthorized building as the owner of the instant unauthorized building.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on May 8, 2018, but the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the appeal on July 23, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 9, and Eul evidence 1 to 4 are each numbers.