1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of land B, land C, and land D (hereinafter referred to as “B”), which is located in the area of development restriction, and the owner of land B, land C, and land in the area of development restriction, which is located in the area of development restriction.

B. The Plaintiff changed the form and quality of each of the instant lands in Gyeonggi-do in 2012. Specifically, the land B was turned into a site to be used as a parking lot, and the land C was converted into a site to be used as a parking lot, and a building site to be used as a parking lot, a goods storage, and an office.

C. On March 5, 2014, the Defendant issued a corrective order demanding the Plaintiff to voluntarily remove and restore the original state by April 3, 2014, and issued a corrective order that the Plaintiff failed to comply with the order, and on August 13, 2014, the Plaintiff failed to restore the original state to the original state by August 30, 2014, which was scheduled to impose a non-performance penalty.

On October 7, 2015, the Defendant issued the instant disposition imposing a non-performance penalty of KRW 50,000,000 on the Plaintiff, who did not comply with the above corrective order.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 to 10 (including branch numbers for those with serial numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion (1) is based on the premise that the imposition of a non-performance penalty is not performed within the correction period, and in this case, once again set the period for performance necessary for the implementation of the corrective order and urge the implementation thereof. Thus, the prior notice of the imposition of a non-performance penalty shall not be conducted together with the corrective order, but the defendant simultaneously issued the corrective order and the notice of imposition, and imposed the non-performance penalty on the premise thereof. Thus, the disposition of this case

(2) Although the Plaintiff did not comply with the corrective order within the time limit determined by the Defendant, the Plaintiff thereafter.