1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On the B’s land on the land, there is 120.6m2, 120.6m2, 8.05m2, and 21m2 in a container temporary office (hereinafter “instant building”) constructed or constructed without obtaining permission or filing a report pursuant to Articles 11 and 20 of the Building Act, and the Plaintiff currently occupies the instant building.

B. On February 6, 2014, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff to remove the instant building by April 7, 2014 pursuant to Article 79 of the Building Act.

② As the Plaintiff failed to comply with the above corrective order within the said corrective period, on April 15, 2014, the Defendant issued the above corrective order to the Plaintiff until May 14, 2014, and notified the Plaintiff that the enforcement fine will be imposed unless it is complied with by the said corrective period.

③ On May 15, 2014, the Defendant extended the period for the performance of the above corrective order by June 16, 2014.

C. The defendant Na

As the corrective order stated in the port was not implemented until June 16, 2014, the enforcement fine of KRW 8,318,980 was imposed and collected on July 21, 2014 against the Plaintiff in accordance with Article 80 of the Building Act.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【Unsatisfyal ground for recognition】 【Unsatisfy ground for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 7, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is to be revoked as it is unlawful in that it is as follows.

(hereinafter referred to as “No. (1), (2), and (3)” in order. ① Since neighborhood living facilities and warehouses among the instant buildings have been extended without permission by a tenant who is not the Plaintiff 12 years prior to their extension, the corrective order and disposition imposing a non-performance penalty against the Plaintiff are unlawful.

② Since portable containers among the instant buildings are built on the land for which the Defendant obtained permission to divert farmland, the said containers are constructed without permission.