1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On January 3, 2007, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Defendant for conversion of 840 square meters of forest land B in Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant land”). The land category was changed to a building site, and used it as a general house upon obtaining permission for conversion of mountainous district. On March 26, 2014, the Plaintiff received an inspection of completion of restoration works and deposited KRW 1,906,000 as a warranty bond.

However, the stone axis constructed in the instant land (hereinafter “the instant stone axis”) collapsed on June 11, 2015, and the Defendant, on May 9, 2018, urged the Plaintiff to repair the stone axis, but failed to comply with it, issued a disposition of an administrative vicarious execution under Article 41 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act and Article 2 of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the purport of the disposition of this case as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case, the main purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion, is that the instant stone axis, which is the owner of neighboring land, intentionally collapseed by piling up stone and soil on the upper part, and by drawing water, so it cannot be deemed that the defects have occurred.

The Plaintiff cannot be deemed to bear the duty of remuneration for the collapse caused by a third party’s act, not due to the defect in the stone shed itself, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful because there is no ground for the disposition.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

Judgment

Article 42 (2) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act imposes an obligation to deposit a warranty bond in order to repair defects that occur after completion inspections for restoration works are completed, and Article 44 (4) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act shall apply to the person who has deposited the warranty bond when the defects of restoration works occur, and if the defects are not repaired, the competent agency shall designate an agent and have the agent repair the defects, and the expenses incurred therein.