1. The plaintiff B's lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff A's claim is dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. A corrective order against Plaintiff A 1) Plaintiff B (hereinafter “Plaintiff B”)

(2) On July 28, 2008, Defendant A’s approval for use was obtained from the head of Si/Gun on July 28, 2008, and around September 3, 2007, Plaintiff A purchased the instant H land and the instant I’s detached housing from Plaintiff A and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 18th of the same month after purchasing the instant I’s name.

(hereinafter) On May 14, 2014, the public officials in charge of Pyeongtaek-gun visited each of the instant buildings on May 14, 2014, and confirmed that the said two buildings and the detached houses were used as accommodation after unauthorized extension and alteration of use. The Plaintiff A committed the said act (hereinafter “violation of the Building Act”).

4) Defendant A issued a corrective order to reinstate A pursuant to Article 79 of the Building Act (hereinafter “instant corrective order”) on May 15, 2014, on the ground that Plaintiff A violated Articles 14 and 19 of the Building Act by committing an act in violation of the Building Act.

B. On April 8, 2008, at the time when Defendant Hyeong-gu applied for the determination of the L/L management plan to Defendant Gyeonggi-do Governor, Defendant H land in the instant case and H land before subdivision (hereinafter “H land in the instant case”) was divided into the instant H land and the instant F land on July 7, 2008.

(A) Before subdivision, I land (the instant I land and the instant G land were divided into the instant land on July 7, 2008) and the instant G land.

(2) After December 22, 2008, the defendant Gyeonggi-do Governor of Gyeonggi-do was a public notice issued by the Second Office of Gyeonggi-do on December 22, 2008, and H. of this case, the land of this case, the land of this case, the K land of this case, and the land of this case, the land of this case, and the land of this case were agricultural and forest areas.