1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing enforcement fines of KRW 41,615,00,00 against the Plaintiffs on September 6, 2014 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners of the D and E-ground buildings at the Seopopopo City of Seopopopopo City (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On July 29, 2014, the Defendant issued a corrective order to order the Plaintiffs to reinstate and take corrective measures until August 26, 2014 (hereinafter “the first corrective order”) on the ground that the use of the instant building is a multi-household house in its original purpose, and it violated the Building Act by illegally altering its use and using it as accommodation facilities.

C. On September 1, 2014, the Plaintiffs drafted each time letter to the Defendant, stating that “The time limit for the change of the use of the instant building to accommodation facilities on or around June 2014,” and that “the time limit for the extension of the instant building on or around January 201,” respectively.

After that, on September 16, 2014, the Defendant imposed the enforcement fine of KRW 41,615,000 on the Plaintiffs pursuant to Article 80 of the Building Act on the ground that “the instant building was changed illegally from a multi-household housing to an accommodation facility, and a part of singing practice room in the instant building was extended.”

hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case"

(ii) [In the absence of dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap evidence 1-1 to 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. According to Articles 79(1) and 80(1) and (2) of the Building Act, in the event that the permitting authority issues the first corrective order to the violating building and fails to comply with the second corrective order within the corrective period, the permitting authority shall again issue the second corrective order within the reasonable period of implementation, and then impose and collect the enforcement fine in advance, if the order is not complied with, and then, impose the enforcement fine. The Defendant’s disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. In particular, among the instant buildings, illegality.