1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.

3...

1. On May 31, 2012, at the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition of succession of administrative vicarious execution against the Plaintiff and revocation of the said disposition in preliminary case. The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff’s primary claim and accepted the conjunctive claim.

In this regard, the defendant appealed only for the plaintiff's conjunctive claim, and the scope of this court's trial is limited to the conjunctive claim.

2. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, a company engaged in the manufacture of advertisements, the advertising agency business, etc., installed a ED electronic display board at the entrance of Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant electronic display board”) from November 2007 to January 2008, and posted various advertisements on the instant electronic display board.

B. On September 30, 201, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to cooperate with removal, stating that the instant electronic sign board “the promotion of the “B development project” was interrupted.

After all, the defendant ordered the plaintiff to voluntarily remove the electronic sign board by June 30, 2012 and to execute it by proxy in accordance with the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act if the plaintiff did not comply with the request for removal several times, and on May 31, 2012, the defendant ordered the plaintiff to voluntarily remove the electric sign board by June 30, 2012.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). 【The ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including each number), the purport of the entire pleadings.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the disposition of this case is unlawful due to the following serious defects, and thus, should be revoked.

1) At the time of the Plaintiff’s installation of the electronic display board of this case by the non-existence of the grounds for the disposition, C shopping malls (hereinafter “C shopping malls”).

B through B, the Defendant requested cooperation on the installation of the electronic sign board of this case, and the Defendant responded to the purport that it may be installed in case of use for public interest purposes at the shopping mall conference.

Electronic sign boards of the shopping mall.