1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance, which the plaintiffs asserted in the trial while appealed, are not different from the contents claimed by the plaintiffs in the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance dismissing the plaintiffs' claims even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the court of first instance are re-

Therefore, the reasoning of this court concerning this case is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiffs as to the following arguments, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

[Supplementary Parts]

A. The Plaintiffs asserted that the instant disposition is an unlawful disposition that is not specifically specified in the instant disposition, on the grounds that the specific method and place of objection were not entirely indicated in the instant disposition.

In the case of an administrative agency's vicarious execution under Article 3 (1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act, the contents and scope of the act of vicarious execution should be specified in the case where the obligor fails to perform it by himself. However, the contents and scope of the act of vicarious execution should not be specified only by a written request for vicarious execution, but also by taking into account the documents served before and after the disposition, or other circumstances, it is sufficient when the contents of the act of vicarious execution are specified

(2) According to the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the disposition of this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In so doing, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, except as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. In so doing, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.