The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Intervenor, and the remainder is assessed against the Defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Where any defect exists in an administrative act, the agency which has rendered the administrative act may cancel it on its own without any legal basis; and

However, when such act is a so-called beneficial administrative act that provides citizens with rights or interests, the public interest needs to be cancelled, and revocation thereof may be cancelled only when the public interest needs to be justified, such as infringement of the right of vested interests of the parties, etc. after comparing and comparing disadvantages such as the right of vested interests and the infringement of trust and stability of legal life.

(2) On February 18, 2016, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, determined on January 11, 2013, that: (a) the Plaintiff’s installation report on the 54th Job Offering Party (hereinafter “the instant wing Party”) was defective on January 11, 2013 in the Fdong of Religious Facilities (hereinafter “Fdong”) located in the religious site as indicated in the lower judgment; (b) the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the implementation of installation by setting the period of business, the number of safe devices, and matters to be observed; and (c) the Plaintiff’s alteration report on the wing Party’s wing Party’s change into eight hundred and twenty (828) equipment; and (c) the Defendant notified the Defendant of the implementation of the alteration report by setting the number of safe devices to be installed on March 13, 2013; and (d) the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the performance of each of the instant disposition to the effect that the instant disposition was unlawful on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s announcement was unlawful.

3. According to the above facts, this case’s disposition is against the instant guard.