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 Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City B 01 9.28 m2, 02 14.03m2 (hereinafter each “non-01m2” and “non-02m2,” and each unit is combined with each unit.

B. On September 25, 2013 and November 4, 2013, the Defendant issued a corrective order with respect to the instant real estate that ordered the Plaintiff to voluntarily maintain the illegal matters, such as the illegal extension and alteration of the purpose of use, based on Article 79(1) of the Building Act.

C. Nevertheless, the Plaintiff did not comply with the corrective order, on December 13, 2013, the Defendant issued a notice of imposition of enforcement fines to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 80 of the Building Act, and issued a disposition imposing enforcement fines (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on January 14, 2014, as indicated below.

Enforcement Decree for the illegal extension of reinforced concrete No. 11, 45.6 14,418,000 Non-02 of the Building Act, Article 11, 90.62, 910,000 non-02 of the Building Act for the illegal extension of reinforced concrete No. 1902, Dec. 325, 199 of the Building Act for the illegal alteration of use of reinforced concrete No. 1210,000

D. On the other hand, on March 19, 2014, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of suspending prosecution against the violation of the Building Act due to illegal extension from the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office, and was subject to a disposition of not having been suspected of violating the Building Act due to illegal alteration of the purpose of use (Evidence of Evidence).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2 and 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s procedural illegality is unlawful since each corrective order and notice of imposition of enforcement fine and notice of disposition of this case did not meet all were served and the requirements for service by public notice were not satisfied. Thus, the instant disposition made by public notice is unlawful.

B. There is no substantial reason for illegality 1) The Plaintiff used non-02 housing units. 2)