1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasoning for this part of the facts admitted by the court is as follows: (a) it is identical to the part concerning “1. Circumstances of dispositions” between the second and fifth pages of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion (i.e., the plaintiff was subject to a stay of execution as to the first appeal.

Nevertheless, since the defendant did not cancel or withdraw the first appeal disposition, the second appeal disposition constitutes an extension of the deadline for payment of the first appeal disposition, which cannot be deemed a new administrative disposition separate from the previous first appeal disposition.

Therefore, the execution of this case by the vicarious execution of this case and the subsequent disposition of this case, which was conducted on the basis of the first step of the suspension of execution.

Shebly, even if the second provisional disposition is a new administrative disposition separate from the first provisional disposition, the second provisional disposition and the instant vicarious execution are unlawful for the following reasons. Thus, the instant disposition based on the second provisional disposition and the instant vicarious execution are unlawful by succeeding to the defects of the second provisional disposition and the instant vicarious execution.

The second appeal is unlawful since it seeks to carry out the vicarious execution without compensation for recycled aggregate by avoiding the effect of the stay of execution in this case.

Now the second appeal is made, part of the defendant's employees without authority are indicated in the name of the defendant's president without legitimate delegation from the defendant's president, and the seal of the defendant's president is not affixed. Therefore, the second appeal is invalid or non-existent.

The Defendant did not set a reasonable implementation period on June 22, 2016, which was 8 days (7 days from the date of receipt of the second order) after the due date from June 14, 2016, when the period for payment was set at the time of the second order.

The Defendant’s instant vicarious execution from around 10:00 on June 23, 2016.