1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each land B and C in Incheon Strengthening Group.

B. The defendant is the status quo owned by the plaintiff.

On November 13, 2014, part of the fence, pent, warehouse, and air Ri constructed on each of the land indicated in the port, found that the State-owned land of this case was occupied without permission, and made a voluntary removal of an unlawful structure (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on November 28, 2014. However, on November 28, 2014, the first disposition was made to the Plaintiff on December 14, 2014, to the effect that the Plaintiff will execute vicarious execution if the Plaintiff did not voluntarily remove and restore the land to its original state by no later than December 14, 2014.

C. On December 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant, asserting that “the instant disposition was unlawful because he did not give prior notice before the instant disposition and did not provide an opportunity to present his opinion,” and that the instant disposition and the first accusation disposition should be revoked.” On December 18, 2014, the Defendant sent a reply to the Plaintiff that “the submission of opinions and other necessary matters would be re-issued after the timely presentation of official notices.”

On February 5, 2015 and February 25, 2015, the Defendant issued the second and third measures to the Plaintiff.

E. On March 9, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Incheon Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission for revocation of the first appeal disposition, which was dismissed on April 27, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 12, 13 and 22, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 did not receive prior notice of the grounds and reasons for the disposition from the defendant prior to the disposition of this case, and did not receive an opportunity to present opinions. The removal disposition of this case is not a removal disposition.