1. The Defendant’s disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff on November 25, 2013 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an architect who works for Han ice Comprehensive Architectural Corporation.

B. On-site investigation and inspection of the Plaintiff related to the approval of use of the building, the Plaintiff was designated as the special prosecutor, such as a field investigation and inspection related to the approval of use of the building listed below (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) from the Magyang-do Building Society in Magyang-do, Jeonyang-do, and conducted a field investigation and inspection of the instant building (hereinafter referred to as the “instant field investigation”) as described in the said table, and submitted a report for approval of use and inspection to the effect that all matters of the investigation are satisfied and do not differ from the permitted design documents, etc., and the Mayang-do Construction Co., Ltd.

A multi-family house B of the fourth floor B of the date of permission for the use of the date of the site investigation (or mining area) of the building site (or the owner of the building) on October 14, 201 on May 2, 2011, 201, May 8, 2011, 201, multi-family house D E of the fourth floor on March 7, 2011, September 26, 2011, October 11, 2011, the apartment house FG of the fourth floor on December 4, 2010 on July 15, 2011, HI of the fourth floor on August 17, 2011.

The plaintiff performed the supervision of the plaintiff's multi-family house, as shown in attached Form 2, conducted the supervision of multi-family houses in which J, K, L, M, N, andO are the owner of the building, and prepared and submitted a report that the building he supervised by the defendant was constructed in compliance with the construction permit.

On January 17, 2013, the Defendant confirmed that the number of households of the instant building increased, contrary to the contents of the building permit received through a joint inspection with public officials belonging to Gwangju-si on January 17, 2013.

Accordingly, the defendant has increased the number of households different from that of the building permit when the plaintiff conducted the field investigation of this case against the plaintiff.