1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

On May 10, 1997, B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) subject to prior enforcement fines, etc. obtained approval for use (hereinafter “instant approval for use”) with respect to aggregate buildings (D 107 Dong-dong) of the fourth floor (hereinafter “instant building”) constructed on the ground of the area of the 713 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”) located on the ground from the Young-si market at permissible time.

The Plaintiff, from May 3, 199, purchased 401 square meters (114.60 square meters in exclusive use area, 9.90 square meters in public use area, 114.60 square meters in common use area, 9.90 square meters (hereinafter “the instant lending”). On May 6, 1999, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name concerning the instant lending.

In around 209, the Defendant conducted a field investigation after receiving a civil petition for the crackdown on illegal buildings on the fourth floor of the instant building, and confirmed that 57.02 square meters (hereinafter “the instant rooftop”) indicated as the fourth rooftop on the drawing of the building ledger of the said building (hereinafter “instant building ledger”) have a cover and a wall installed on the instant rooftop, and that the said rooftop is used as the indoor indoor space of the instant Ba.

On April 21, 2009, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to reinstate the instant rooftop by May 31, 2009, and notified the Plaintiff that the said violation was entered in the building ledger, and imposed KRW 9,921,480 on the Plaintiff on December 11, 2009.

On November 25, 201, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the rooftop of this case was restored to its original condition, and entered the “cancellation of a building in violation” in the building ledger of this case.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff paid all enforcement fines on November 30, 201.

On February 28, 2012, the Defendant confirmed that the rooftop of this case was not restored to its original state, and again issued a corrective order (hereinafter “instant corrective order”) stating that “the pertinent rooftop is to be restored to its original state by April 13, 2012,” to the Plaintiff. At the same time, the Defendant entered “violation building” in the instant building ledger, and issued the said corrective order.