1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From October 2014, the Plaintiff is operating a “Chovawon” in a state where street signboards, etc. are installed on the second floor of the building in the Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant Council member”).

B. On April 30, 2015, the Defendant received civil petition documents that illegal outdoor advertisements are installed in the above building, and confirmed that three Plaintiff’s horizontal signboards, one protruding-type signboard, and one banner (hereinafter “instant signboards, etc.”) were installed without reporting under Article 3 of the former Outdoor Advertisements, etc. Control Act (amended by Act No. 13726, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply).

Accordingly, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff to remove the instant signboard, etc. on May 11, 2015, June 15, 2015, and July 16, 2015, the Defendant imposed KRW 1,950,000 for non-performance penalty on September 17, 2015, following prior notice of imposition of non-performance penalty on September 17, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “disposition imposing enforcement fines”) of this case

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal, but the Gyeongnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on January 27, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 10 through 17, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff reported the instant signboard, etc. to the Defendant as an outdoor advertisement, but the Defendant did not receive the application document while obtaining permission from D, not a manager, and the Plaintiff became subject to the instant disposition due to the Defendant’s act in violation of the Defendant’s duty as seen above. Therefore, the instant disposition was unlawful (No. 1). (2) The Plaintiff sent a certification of content as to the prior notice of imposition of enforcement fines on September 14, 2015, but the Defendant without any explanation or response thereto.