계고처분취소
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. The portion resulting from the participation in the total cost of the lawsuit.
1. The court's reasoning concerning this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. In the event that the execution of vicarious execution based on the instruction of judgment on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit was completed as a factual act, there is no legal benefit to seek the invalidity confirmation or revocation of the instant action or the execution of vicarious execution itself.
(See Supreme Court Decision 95Nu2623 Decided July 28, 1995, etc.). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 36 and 37, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the instant temporary building and the instant slaughter facilities subject to the instant disposition are vicariously executed on May 25, 2018 and June 5, 2018, and completed the said vicarious execution.
Therefore, the instant lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant disposition is unlawful as there is no legal interest.
3. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance has different conclusions, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed.