1. Imposition of enforcement fines of KRW 23,55,00 against the Plaintiff on January 2, 2014; and imposition of enforcement fines of KRW 23,55,00 on June 12, 2014.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff on November 5, 2013 pursuant to Article 79(1) of the Building Act to restore the site to the original state by December 5, 2013, on the ground that “the fourth floor of the fourth floor warehouse building” (hereinafter “instant building”) in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant building”) changed the use of the warehouse facilities from the warehouse facilities without permission. The Defendant issued a corrective order to the original state by December 1, 2013; ② the notice of the accusation of the violation of the Building Act and the imposition of charges for compelling compliance (Evidence 11-3); ② the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff on December 11, 2013; and ③ the imposition of charges for compelling compliance KRW 23,55,00 on January 2, 2014 (hereinafter “the imposition of charges for compelling compliance with the fourth floor”). The Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff on the ground that the alteration of the use of the “one to the third floor” of the instant building was installed facilities without permission.

C. The Defendant: (a) on the ground that the instant building (1) was changed to a sports facility without permission from the warehouse facilities; (b) on August 23, 2018, a prior notice of repeated imposition of charges for compelling compliance in violation of the Building Act (Evidence A1) was issued pursuant to Article 21(1) of the Administrative Procedures Act; and (c) a disposition imposing charges for compelling compliance amounting to KRW 89,148,000 (hereinafter “disposition imposing charges for compelling compliance”) on December 26, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition imposing charges for compelling compliance”) [based on recognition] without dispute; (d) evidence Nos. 1, 2; and evidence Nos. 11 and 12-1 through 4; and (e) evidence Nos. 3-4, 8, and 9; and (e) the purport of the entire pleadings

2. As to the defense prior to the merits, the Defendant sought confirmation of invalidity of the Plaintiff’s “disposition imposing enforcement fines on the fourth floor of the instant case” and “disposition imposing enforcement fines on the first to third floor of the instant case.”