계고처분취소
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The Plaintiffs were co-owners holding 1/3 shares of the Seoul Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Land D and E (hereinafter “instant land”) and completed registration of preservation of ownership by constructing a building of the fourth floor above the ground level, which is the use of Class I and II neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land, around January 4, 2016 after obtaining a building permit from the Defendant, and completing registration of preservation of ownership by jointly sharing one-third shares of each of them.
On the other hand, on September 22, 2015, before the building of this case was newly constructed, F, from January 4, 2016, operated a pharmacy with the name of “G pharmacy” in the building of this case from around January 4, 2016.
On August 16, 2016, the Defendant issued a corrective order to remove the instant container and restore it to its original state until September 20, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “instant corrective order”) to the Plaintiffs, the owner of the instant building, who was the owner of the instant building, by the extension of a single-story container building (hereinafter referred to as “instant container”) with a size of 12 square meters, without a construction permit or a construction report.
As the Plaintiffs failed to comply with the instant corrective order, on September 22, 2016, the Defendant issued a corrective order to remove the instant container and restore it to its original state by October 12, 2016 (hereinafter “the second corrective order”), and on October 13, 2016, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiffs to remove the instant container and restore it to its original state, and on October 15, 2016, issued a corrective order to the Plaintiffs pursuant to Article 3(1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act and issued a vicarious execution pursuant to Article 3(1) and to the effect that the expenses for vicarious execution will be collected from the Plaintiffs, and “the instant order along with the instant corrective order.”
(B) [No dispute over the basis for recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul.]