1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked, and all the plaintiffs' claims corresponding to this part shall be claimed.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs share a commercial building without permission on the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C ground (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On January 15, 2015, a fire occurred in the instant building, and part of the building was destroyed. In the process of repairing the building, the Plaintiffs were partially reconstructed without permission or reporting.

C. Before the above fire, the Defendant imposed a non-performance penalty on the Plaintiffs as to the instant building in violation of the Building Act, and calculated a non-performance penalty by applying the steel pipe structure index 0.2 and the annual residual rate of 0.44 to the new construction.

그런데 피고는 원고들이 시정명령에 불응하자 불법 개축된 부분의 면적을 275㎡로 보고 이에 관한 이행강제금으로 조립식패널조 구조지수 0.5와 2015년 신축건물의 신축연도별 잔가율 1을 적용하여 63,813,000원(≒ 2015년 건물신축가격 기준액 650, 000원/㎡ × 구조지수 0.5 × 용도지수 1.2 × 위치지수 1.4 × 위반면적 275㎡ × 부과요율 0.5 × 감면율 0.85, 천원 이하 버림)을 산정한 후 2015. 6. 25. 원고들에게 위 이행강제금을 부과하는 처분(이하 ‘이 사건 처분’이라고 한다)을 하였다.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4 through 6 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

1. Even after the reconstruction of the structure index and the annual residual rate by new construction, the instant building is a cover over the steel pipe structure, and thus, the enforcement fine should be calculated by applying the steel pipe structure index 0.2 and the residual rate by the elapsed elapsed 0.44, such as the Defendant calculated before fire.

Even if part of the building of this case after fire is built of a prefabricated panel.