1. The Defendant’s disposition of business suspension against the Plaintiff on November 25, 2013 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an architect who operates B architect office.

B. The Plaintiff’s on-site investigation and inspection related to the approval of use of a building was designated as the special prosecutor, such as a field investigation and inspection, in relation to the approval of use of the building (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Yacheon-do Building Association in Jeonnam-do, and conducted an on-site investigation and inspection (hereinafter “the instant on-site investigation”) of the instant building as indicated in the said table. The Plaintiff prepared a report for approval for use investigation and inspection to the effect that all matters of the investigation are satisfied and do not differ from the permitted design documents, etc. and submitted it to the Y-do Mayor on the basis of the said report.

A multi-family house CDD CD on the fourth-story floor on the date of approval for the use of the date of the on-site investigation of the building location (net City building owner) building permit date, on January 14, 201, July 14, 2011, the apartment house EF on July 4, 201, April 27, 2011, shall be held on October 20, 201.

The plaintiff performed the supervision of the plaintiff's multi-family house, like the details in attached Form 2, conducted the supervision of the multi-family house in which G and H are the owner of the building, and prepared and submitted a report to the defendant that the building he supervised is constructed in compliance with the contents of the building permit.

On January 9, 2013, the Defendant confirmed that the number of households of the instant building increased differently from the details of the building permit received through a joint inspection with public officials belonging to the relevant Si of Netcheon-si.

Accordingly, the defendant submitted to the plaintiff the false inspection report that the building of this case was constructed properly despite the increase in the number of households different from the construction permit in conducting the field investigation of this case, and ② the supervision of multi-family houses such as G, etc. was different from the design document while conducting the supervision of multi-family houses