1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is that the plaintiff has extended the 8th floor of the building of this case, according to the overall purport of Gap evidence No. 6, Eul evidence No. 3, and the whole argument No. 8th floor of the building of this case. Thus, the plaintiff constitutes the owner of the building, etc. who is subject to charges for compelling compliance under Article 79(1) of the Building Act.

(A) Since the Plaintiff recognized that it was a lessee with respect to the eightth floor of the instant building from March 2013, the Plaintiff is a possessor of the instant building, this part of the building constitutes a building owner subject to charges for compelling compliance under Article 79(1) of the Building Act, as well as the grounds for the judgment of the first instance. As such, the Plaintiff is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

In conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.