1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Defendant imposed KRW 416,500 on September 1, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff, on the back of the building of the total floor area of 199.28 square meters in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, extended the total area of 20 square meters and 14 square meters in a prefabricated panel (hereinafter “instant violating building”).

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition in relation to the instant violating building at around 200, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition imposing a non-performance penalty in relation to the instant violating building at around 200, but the Seoul District Court’s Dong Branch branch branch by administrative litigation was decided not to impose a fine for negligence on the offender.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff already paid acquisition tax on the building in violation of the instant case.

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful against the principle of trust protection.

Judgment

1. In general in administrative legal relations, in order to apply the rules of trust protection to the acts of administrative agencies, first, the administrative agency should name the public opinion that is the object of trust to the individual, second, when the opinion list of the administrative agency is justifiable and trusted, there should be no cause attributable to the individual. Third, the individual should have trusted that the opinion list of the administrative agency was well trusted, and third, when the administrative agency made a disposition contrary to the above opinion list, which is contrary to the above opinion list, thereby infringing on the interests of the individual who trusted that opinion list of the administrative agency. If any administrative disposition satisfies these requirements, it is unlawful as an act contrary to the principles of trust protection unless it is likely to seriously undermine the public interest or legitimate interests of third

On the other hand, in judging whether there is a public opinion statement of an administrative agency, it is not necessarily a formal sense of authority in the administrative organization.