1. The defendant's multi-family house B on November 14, 2003 (the 3rd underground floor above the ground and the 376.98 square meters above the ground) is located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

1. Basic facts

A. Upon obtaining a building permit on March 29, 2001, the Plaintiff newly built a multi-family house with the size of one story underground of the third underground floor in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”) and obtained approval for the use thereof from the Defendant on November 23, 2001.

In the first place, the Plaintiff was permitted to use only one household with the first floor of the instant building having a studio and to use only one household.

B. However, around November 24, 2001, after the date of approval for use, the Plaintiff remodeled the first floor of the instant building to be used by two households by installing a partition wall between the entrance of the first floor and the main room of the instant building without reporting to the Defendant, and by using the entrance in the direction of the existing stairs room.

C. On October 2003, the Defendant discovered the increased fact that one household under the ground above increased through a cross-inspection among autonomous Gus (autonomous Gus), and on November 14, 2003, entered the following matters in the column for the change of the general building ledger (A) of the instant building on November 14, 2003, and marked “violationed building” on the table.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) Date of change: Details and cause of change on November 14, 2003: Details of change: Violation D, Nov. 12, 2003: Increase in household under ground.

D. On December 22, 2003, the defendant discovered additional violations of the building of this case and entered the following matters in the same change column on the following day.

The date of change: Details and cause of change on December 23, 2003: In accordance with subparagraph E ( December 22, 2003), illegally marked buildings (violation of violation: 9m2 for multi-story, 18m2 for multi-story, 3m2 for multi-story, 3m2 for multi-story, 18m2 for multi-story)

E. On November 7, 2005, the Defendant imposed a non-performance penalty on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff was engaged in a large-scale repair without filing a prior report and failed to comply with a corrective order, as described in B. B. The court accepted the Plaintiff’s objection disputing the legality of the imposition, and decided not to impose a non-performance penalty.

F. The defendant on December 2007