1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of litigation shall be borne by B representing the representative director of the plaintiff;

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant imposed charges for causing traffic congestion and additional charges on the Plaintiff on the ground that “A neighborhood living facilities and parking lots building with a total floor area of 1,568.09 square meters on the 7th underground floor in Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which are owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”) are subject to charges for causing traffic congestion.”

B. Accordingly, B filed an administrative appeal on the part of the charges for causing traffic congestion and additional dues under the Plaintiff’s name as the representative director, which was dismissed by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on March 11, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1, 2, 4 through 8, and 10 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. According to Article 36(7) of the Urban Traffic Improvement Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11801, May 22, 2013), a parking lot is not a traffic-causing facility, and the parking lot area should be excluded from the total floor area of the building subject to imposition.

Therefore, the total floor area of the instant building is less than 1,568.09 square meters, and the area used as a commercial building is less than 1,000 square meters if it is excluded from 1,074.42 square meters used as a parking lot among them, and thus, it does not constitute the subject of charges for causing traffic congestion.

B. The traffic inducement charge is exempted if the traffic inducement charge is significantly low or if it is inevitable for the public interest. Accordingly, the Plaintiff did not impose the traffic inducement charge for 21 years.

3. To make entries in the attached statutes concerned;

4. Determination on the legality of a lawsuit

A. The defendant's assertion B is not the representative director of the plaintiff, and the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as the plaintiff's claim No.

B. The Plaintiff, such as the organization of shareholders, is a company established for the main purpose of the sound planning and sound manufacturing, etc.

From August 5, 2008 to April 25, 2013, the Plaintiff’s total issued shares are common shares.