beta
Text
The litigation of this case shall be dismissed.
The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff (the plaintiff in retrial).
the purport and purpose of the claim;
Reasons
1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent or apparent to this court.
A. 1) On February 18, 1998, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of fine for negligence of KRW 2,079,000 as to the building without permission from the Defendant on the part of the owner of a wooden tank 54 square meters of a house with a 54 square meters of land above the Busan Geum-gu B (hereinafter “instant land”) located within the development restriction zone.
2) Around March 2006, the Defendant discovered the fact that the Plaintiff extended the instant building and the size of the building was 86 square meters, and on the ground of the instant land, other than the instant building, that the Plaintiff additionally constructed an illegal building, including ① 15 square meters in housing, ② 21.3 square meters in housing, ③ 23.04 square meters in height, and issued a corrective order, demand for correction, and a prior disposition notification to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff corrected the instant building ① or ③, but the instant building was partially removed, and the area of the instant building was finally 81.5 square meters in size.
3) On June 1, 2010, the Defendant imposed KRW 1,548,00 on the Plaintiff on November 9, 2010, when the instant building violated Article 12 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Areas subject to Restriction of Development, and imposed an order for correction, correction, and the imposition of compulsory performance, such as restoration of the original state, but did not correct the order. However, the Defendant imposed KRW 1,548,00 on the Plaintiff on November 9, 2010.
B. On February 10, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an administrative litigation against the Defendant and the judgment subject to a retrial. On November 9, 201, the Plaintiff brought an action against the Defendant seeking revocation of a compulsory performance imposition, which the Defendant filed with the Busan District Court 201Guhap 7555, and the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on May 12, 201.
2) On February 18, 2012, the Plaintiff appealed as Busan High Court Decision 201Nu1894, and the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal (hereinafter “the appellate court”).