1. Upon the Plaintiff’s request that the court changed the exchange in this court, the Defendant against the Plaintiff on April 7, 2017.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 5, 2011, L used a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant store”) that prepares and sells daily meals in the name of “D” in the Yansan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Ma (hereinafter “D”) and operated it.

However, the store of this case is located in G district of the Jeonju Urban Management Planning (G District Unit Planning Zone) publicly notified as the F of the Notice at Jeonju-si on November 15, 2011.

Common matters applicable to I districts, J districts, K districts, and G districts;

3. Non-permission purpose (the non-permission purpose shall take precedence over the permitted purpose);

(b) A restaurant that cooks and sells foreign food, such as facilities (a), heavy meals, and culture, among general restaurants referred to in subparagraph 4 (a) of attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act among Class II neighborhood living facilities referred to in subparagraph 4 of subparagraph 4 of the same Article, combined with foreign food, and (b) a restaurant that cooks and sells food in the shape of Furrate type:

B. On November 18, 2013, the Defendant publicly announced as of November 18, 2013, determined the former Urban Management Planning (G Area District Unit Planning and Planning) and publicly announced approval of topographic drawings (hereinafter “instant district unit planning”). Of them, the content relating to the instant case is as follows:

C. On May 18, 2015, after accepting the instant store from L from May 18, 2015 and completing a report on succession to the status of a business operator by changing the trade name into E, the Plaintiff is operating a heavy restaurant from May 4, 2016 to prepare and sell heavy food at the said store on April 2016.

On May 4, 2016, the Defendant issued an advance notice and a corrective order (hereinafter “previous disposition”) to the Plaintiff to take corrective measures up to May 14, 2016 pursuant to Article 133(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) on the ground that the Plaintiff used the instant store for the purpose of denying the use of it in the district unit planning.

E. On June 15, 2016, the Plaintiff is the Defendant.