1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders revocation below, shall be revoked.

Defendant.

1. The Plaintiff sought revocation of the imposition of each penalty points stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant. The judgment of the court of first instance accepted the Plaintiff’s claim only for the 3, 4 parts of the attached list among the respective dispositions, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim as to the remaining 1, 2, 5, and 6 parts of the attached list.

Accordingly, only the plaintiff appealed against the dismissal of the above dismissal part, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the above 1, 2, 5, and 6, and the above 3 and 4 were excluded.

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the reasoning for this part of the pertinent laws and regulations are as stated in the grounds for appeal. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

3. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to whether each of the dispositions in this case is unlawful is as follows. Thus, the reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this part is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, since Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are cited.

【The part of the decision of the court of first instance to be dismissed 【The ground for the second disposition of this case is recognized” in Part 9 from the 9th day below as follows.

D. In addition, even though the Plaintiff’s failure to install a Class A door on the fire escape stairs falls under “other structural parts” and the Plaintiff’s failure to install a Class A door is subject to penalty points, the Plaintiff’s failure to easily replace the steel door which was already installed after being pointed out by the Defendant as to the instant disposition No. 2, thereby supplementing that the Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the relevant provision standards. As such, the defect does not fall under “cases where supplementary construction is necessary” as provided in subparagraph 5(a)(18) of the instant attached Table, and falls under “cases where minor repair is required” of the penalty points.