1. On July 15, 2019, the Defendant confirmed that a payment of KRW 1,187,616,000 against the Plaintiff is null and void.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit on the business facilities with the size of 2 stories underground, 16 stories above ground, and 17,310 square meters below the total floor area on the ground outside the territory of Ansan-gun and one parcel (hereinafter “instant building”).

The design drawings submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of filing an application for a building permit are written with the distance from the cadastral line to the outer wall of the instant building (0.95m to 0.99m) and the distance from the center line of the instant building (1.20m to 1.22m). As such, the building limit line was less than 2m.

B. On July 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) neglected that the design drawings submitted by the Plaintiff violated the relevant provisions of Article 54 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 60 of the C District Unit Planning Guidelines; (b) granted a building permit on the instant building to the Plaintiff.

C. Upon completion of the construction of the instant building, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval for the use of the instant building on March 26, 2019, and on May 1, 2019, the Defendant rejected the said application on the ground that the distance related to the Building Limit is inappropriate (hereinafter “instant refusal disposition”).

On May 2, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking the revocation of the instant refusal disposition with the Jeonnam-do Administrative Appeals Commission. On June 27, 2019, the said commission rendered a ruling that the instant refusal disposition on the instant building, which is an illegal building, is legitimate. However, the said ruling rendered a ruling that “the instant refusal disposition is revoked on the condition that the Plaintiff would recover unjust enrichment (resumed KRW 1.3 billion) due to the Plaintiff’s tort (resumed to society) (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) on the ground that the disadvantages the Plaintiff, the contractor, and the collaborative company, etc., suffer higher disadvantages than the public interest in the construction administration intended to achieve.

E. On July 15, 2019, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the payment of KRW 1,187,616,00 as unjust enrichment according to the said judgment (hereinafter “instant disposition”).