1. The Defendant’s refusal of design change made on August 19, 2014 to the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff filed an application for a building permit with the Defendant around March 2014 in order to newly build a motor vehicle maintenance business office on the ground of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and obtained the building permit from the second class neighborhood living facilities (repair stores) on April 25, 2014.

B. On June 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to change the main purpose of the said building to an automobile-related facility (maintenance plant) by keeping all relevant documents, such as design documents, as prescribed by the Building Act, etc.

C. On August 22, 2014, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for change on the ground that “The permission for individual maintenance factories is anticipated to have difficulty in realizing the comprehensive development plan under the status that the comprehensive development plan, etc. was not determined, and thus, the permission for construction of maintenance factories until the establishment of the comprehensive development plan (C-D regional living zone plan, etc.) of Seoul Metropolitan Government was not dealt with.”

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On July 18, 2014, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to supplement each of the documents (e.g., cut and supplemented matters) on the ground that the establishment of the chief prosecutor of the underground floor on July 18, 2014, on the ground that it is inappropriate due to the difficulty in entering large vehicles (e.g., parking management and supplementary matters), and on July 30, 2014, and on the ground that the documents confirming whether it was cut and filled up are insufficient. The Plaintiff completed each of the supplementation around that time. (ii) The Defendant deliberated on the Plaintiff’s application for permission for change on August 12, 2018. As a result of the deliberation, the Defendant decided that “The individual permission for the maintenance factory is anticipated to have difficulty in realizing the comprehensive development plan for the planned management and development promotion.”

3 The defendant is a corporation F, which is located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul around March 2015.