1. On September 12, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition of rejection of an application for the change of building use filed against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 6, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to change the purpose of construction with the head of 105 (42.9 square meters in the section of exclusive ownership; hereinafter “instant building”) among the buildings B in Busan-gun, Busan-gun, to the first class neighborhood living facilities (retail stores) and amusement taverns.

B. On September 12, 2014, after deliberation by the Building Committee pursuant to Article 11(4)1 of the former Building Act (amended by Act No. 13325, May 18, 2015; hereinafter “former Building Act”), the Defendant issued a disposition to return the same on September 12, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case should be revoked on the grounds that the disposition of this case is unlawful and unjust for the following reasons.

1) The instant building is located within the general commercial area. Considering the fact that the instant building is located within the general commercial area, and is located outside of the neighborhood or living distance of residents in the residential area, such as a distance of more than 100 meters from the boundary of the residential area to 500 meters, and is located outside the school environment cleanup zone away from 1.0km to 1.5km in a straight line with the neighboring educational facilities, and its surrounding area has already been developed so that local residents may enjoy entertainment in the general commercial area, it is difficult to view that the instant building has a negative impact on the residential or educational environment even if the use of the instant building is changed to amusement facilities (entertainment). Nevertheless, the instant disposition otherwise determined is a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority (hereinafter referred to as “section 1”).

2) The Defendant granted permission to change the use of the instant building to amusement taverns (e.g., amusement taverns) in the first and second neighborhood living facilities with respect to the buildings directly adjacent to the instant building several times.