1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part concerning the conclusion of April), except for the modification of the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance as described in the following (2). As such, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8

2. The following is added to 5 pages below 3 of the amended part, : “In addition, the Plaintiff’s application for a building permit does not violate the Parking Lot Act.” The Plaintiff’s application for the building permit was also declared to be “.......... I have declared to be declared.. The latter Supreme Court (2016Da236384) declared to be “........ I have dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal by the hearing conducted on November 10, 2016.......) The following is added to 4) The instant land is adjacent to the O road, the width of which is about 2m to 2.4m.

(See 5) The Defendant granted a building permit for E and F land adjoining to the lower surface of the packaging in 1993 and 194 (see the second surface drawing), and the width of the packaging part of the instant case does not reach four meters from the required width under Article 2 (1) 11 of the Building Act. Thus, the Defendant set aside the horizontal distance equivalent to one-half of the four meters from the centerline of the instant building and made it possible to construct the instant construction by 3,5,10, 14, and 31-33 of the two pages below the five pages of “A 3,5,8, 10, 11, 14, 31, 31, 32, 41, 42, 45 and 46 (including the following parts of the instant case’s construction permit for the purpose of removing it from the surface of the instant case’s 6th 5th 7th 7th 5th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 5th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 7.