1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court’s judgment, except for the addition of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion in the trial under Paragraph (2) below, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion ① The plan to create a shelter for the residents of the Japan in the instant river site is not based on a civil petition at the same level, but is commenced with the defendant's direction. ② The public official in charge of the Maritime Affairs and Daegu Office ordered the plaintiff to remove the roof of the structure installed in the instant river site and to reinforce the wall of the building installed in the instant river site so that the period of permission to occupy and use is not extended, and eventually, the plaintiff suffered losses as the construction cost is not extended, and the public official in charge at the time of the said construction did not inform the plaintiff that the building permit is needed, ③ the plaintiff was illegally constructed, ③ the defendant did not notify the plaintiff that the plan was being implemented, and ④ the defendant did not request the plaintiff to reinstate the building without compensation and relocation compensation for the structure installed in the instant river site. According to the fact that the instant disposition violated the Administrative Procedures Act, and the plaintiff's excessive infringement of the plaintiff's interest compared to the needs for

B. Determination 1: (a) The Plaintiff’s assertion No. 1 was examined, and even if the plan to create a rest place in the part of the residents in the instant river site began with the Defendant’s direction at the beginning, such circumstance alone does not constitute a ground to deny the public interest, such as the residents’ needs or interests, and rather, in light of the location, form, and surrounding land, etc. recognized by the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings submitted in the first instance trial, the only part of the instant river site is the residents’ rest place.