1. To dismiss the instant lawsuit that has been changed in exchange at the trial;

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is operating C in a household building constructed on the part of 2.3 square meters of land among the roads B in Busan Jung-gu (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. Although the Defendant decided to remove the instant building by November 24, 2014 on the ground that the instant building was an illegal building in violation of the Road Act, the Defendant failed to perform it. On December 2, 2014, ordered the Plaintiff to perform administrative vicarious execution pursuant to Article 3(1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act in cases where the Plaintiff did not remove the instant building by December 19, 2014.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant order”). C.

As the Plaintiff did not continuously remove the instant building, on March 6, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of a warrant of vicarious administrative execution, stating the purport to conduct vicarious execution on March 14, 2015, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act.

hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of Notification"

(D) On March 24, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant order, and subsequently, filed a petition of appeal as of September 24, 2015, and sought the revocation of the instant order upon submitting a petition of appeal as of September 24, 2015, exchanged the purport of the claim for revocation of the instant order. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute or obvious fact on the record, Party A’s Nos. 1, 7, 8, 1, 7, 8, 1, 7, 8, and 8 (if there is a serial number, each of the entries and

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits

A. The plaintiff sought the revocation of the instant order disposition in the first instance court, which led to the first instance court’s amendment of the purport of the claim to seek the revocation of the instant order. However, the instant lawsuit, the exchange of which was changed in the first instance court’s trial, was filed with the lapse of the filing period stipulated in Article 20 of the Administrative Litigation Act, and thus, is unlawful.

B. (1) A revocation suit shall be filed within 90 days from the date on which the disposition, etc. is known, and there is a disposition, etc.