1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for revocation of the corrective order dated April 29, 2019 shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, upon obtaining a building permit from the Defendant on January 8, 2014, newly constructed a religious facility on the general steel structure and other two-story roof buildings (one story 412.8 square meters, two stories 64.74 square meters) on the six parcels, other than Incheon-gun B, Incheon-gun, and obtained approval for the use from the Defendant on April 9, 2015.

B. Around 2017, without obtaining the Defendant’s permission in violation of Article 11 of the Building Act, the Plaintiff extended the second class neighborhood living facilities (office) of the second class neighborhood living facilities (office) on the first floor of the building on the first floor of the building, and the second class neighborhood living facilities (boiler rooms) of the second class neighborhood living facilities on the first floor of the underground.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant building section”) C.

Around February 12, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to extend the instant building portion. On March 21, 2019, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff, which orders the Plaintiff to restore the instant building portion to its original state by April 23, 2019 pursuant to Article 79 of the Building Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”). On April 29, 2019, the Plaintiff issued a corrective order to urge the Plaintiff to restore the instant building portion to its original state.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As seen earlier, on March 21, 2019, the Defendant issued the instant disposition that ordered the Plaintiff to restore the instant building portion to its original state, and issued a corrective order that urged the Plaintiff to restore the instant building portion to its original state on April 29, 2019 when the Plaintiff failed to comply with the order. The Plaintiff’s obligation to restore the instant building portion to its original state was caused by the Defendant’s disposition. The Defendant’s corrective order that was issued on April 29, 2019 did not impose a new duty to restore to the instant building portion, but rather urged or extended the time limit.