1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows: (a) the court shall use the “46.4 square meters” of the judgment of the court of first instance as “46.4 square meters,” and (b) 6.8 square meters of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) even if several buildings are registered in the building management ledger of a development restriction zone on one of the six sides of the judgment of the court of first instance, if it cannot be deemed as an independent building in structural and functional aspect, it may be reasonable to permit relocation only once if the building management ledger of the building management ledger of the development restriction zone of the housing and the neighborhood living facilities of this case (Evidence No. 1) can not be seen as an independent building in structural and functional function; (d) the Defendant appears to have been a separate building independent of structural function; and (e) the civil petition communications of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport with respect to the interpretation of statutes is merely a reply to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s opinion as to the interpretation of statutes, and is not bound by the court.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified on the grounds of its conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.