이행강제금부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the third underground and the sixth ground-based C Building in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).
As a result of the criminal case of a violation of the Building Act regarding a non-permission extension area, on March 10, 2010, the installation of 42.09 square meters in the 1st among the 1st underground floor, which was 42.09 square meters in the 1st underground floor; on March 10, 2010; the installation of an indoor 2nd underground floor with 37.50 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the indoor 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the open ground floor, the installation of an open ground floor with 30.53 square meters in the 30.53 square meters in the 142.67 square meters in the 142.44 square meters in the 2010 square meters in the 19.19.19.22 outdoor expanding in the 219.6.19.
B. The Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to voluntarily correct the following portion of unauthorized extension on the ground that the Plaintiff’s extension of the instant building was without permission as follows. On June 15, 2010, the Defendant issued an order to impose KRW 166,952,660 upon the Plaintiff’s failure to implement the corrective order and comply therewith.
In the instant disposition, the rooftop part was indicated as “a rooftop,” but the following is referred to as “a rooftop,” except when the entry in the instant disposition is invoked as it is.
C. The Plaintiff failed to comply with the enforcement order on the remainder of the ground second floor (excluding the part on the installation of the above table). On July 30, 2010, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the submission of opinions following the imposition of the charge for compelling compliance and on August 13, 2010, imposed KRW 160,266,590 on the remainder of the violation area on the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant disposition, but was dismissed on January 24, 201.
【Ground of recognition” has no dispute, A1, 2 evidence, and .