2. Defendant Daejeon Metropolitan City.

A. Whether this part of the lawsuit is legitimate, 1) The prior notice of the head of the Gu’s defense in the Daejeon Metropolitan City among Defendant Daejeon Metropolitan City on November 25, 2013 is merely a prior notice of the head of the Gu’s prior notice of an administrative disposition on the part of Defendant Daejeon Metropolitan City, which is a procedure for issuing a corrective order, such as a corrective order, and cannot be deemed a disposition. Thus, the prior notice of the administrative disposition is unlawful. 2) The prior notice of the administrative disposition is to give the person subject to the disposition an opportunity to state his opinion, and is not

According to each description of evidence No. 3, evidence No. 3, Eul, and evidence No. 1-2 of the defendant Daejeon Metropolitan City, the head of the Gu among the defendant Daejeon Metropolitan City, on November 25, 2013, the owner of the five-story building on the ground (hereinafter "the building of this case") of the building of the five-story building on the ground of the Jung-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter "the building of this case") and the plaintiff Eul used the building of this case for the purpose of using it to amusement facilities (a dance institute and dance hall) without permission or report on the use of the building of this case without permission under Article 79 of the Building Act and Article 21 of the Administrative Procedures Act, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the head of the Gu of the Daejeon Metropolitan City or the head of the Gu issued a corrective order to the plaintiff B and C around that time.

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit against the defendant B and C against the head of the Jung-gu Daejeon Metropolitan City is not a disposition that is not subject to a revocation or is not a disposition that is subject to an appeal, and thus, the objection of the head of the Gu in the Daejeon Metropolitan City is justified.

B. The prior notice of this case is lawful, and the prior notice of this case is corrective order.