1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff owns the building of 19 square meters in Jung-gu, Seoul and the coagu, Jung-gu, Seoul and the coagu, apap, respectively (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On August 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) specified the current status of the building in violation of the Plaintiff (unauthorized) on the following grounds; (b) stated that “the instant building violated the lawful permission and reporting stipulated under the Building Act” under Article 79(1) of the Building Act; and (c) stated that “the first corrective order is issued to “the execution of the procedure for approval of use following voluntary removal or lawful permission and reporting by September 30, 2015” (hereinafter “the first corrective order”).

B B A 1998 extension (one story 10.2 Swiss/Jll housing of less than 85 square meters) with a location of the building owner for the purpose of structural use of the area in the form of occurrence of the year in which the building owner occurs.

C. On October 6, 2015, the Defendant, who did not remove the Plaintiff by the deadline specified in the first corrective order, returned to the Plaintiff.

A disposition to specify the current status of a building in violation (unauthorized) as prescribed in paragraph (1) and to order “the implementation of the procedure for approval for use pursuant to voluntary removal or lawful permission and report by November 10, 2015” (hereinafter “instant corrective order”). The written disposition formulated at the time of the instant corrective order was written by the relevant provisions as “Article 79(1) of the Building Act” but, in addition, the written disposition was written by the relevant provisions as “Article 79(1) of the Building Act,” but, in relation to the period as of November 10, 2015, it was given 20 days for the period of the self-rec

“The purpose of “the enforcement fine” was emphasized and the enforcement fine is imposed pursuant to Article 80(1) of the Building Act if the performance is not made within the given period.

D. The purport of the instant corrective order was also stated. The Defendant, on November 25, 2015, specified the current status of the building (unauthorized) in violation of the instant corrective order, as stated in paragraph (b) to the Plaintiff on November 25, 2015, and violated the procedure for approval for use by obtaining permission or filing a report under the Building Act, and thus, Article 80 of the Building Act.