건축물용도변경허가신청불허가처분취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The public interest that is infringed upon due to the change of the purpose of use of the building of this case is an infringement on the residential environment and educational environment of neighboring apartment residents. However, there is no significant public interest that is infringed because neighboring apartment residents already set the use of the site of this case before moving into apartment.
In addition, considering the daily life of neighboring apartment residents and the roads generally used at the time of attending school, it is unlikely that the vicinity of the building of this case may infringe on the residential and educational environment.
Furthermore, the reason why the Plaintiff purchased the site of the instant building at a low price compared to other sites was that the site of the instant building is commercial areas that can be constructed by amusement facilities except slot electricity business operators and casino business operators according to district unit planning, and the Incheon Urban Corporation, which is the project implementer of the instant housing unit development project, was also a project site that can be constructed by amusement facilities.
In light of the aforementioned various circumstances, even if part of the building of this case is changed to amusement facilities, the disposition of this case, which was conducted without any basis pursuant to the civil petition of neighboring residents, is unlawful by abusing discretion against the principle of proportionality, and is against the principle of equity in light of the fact that permission for change of use of amusement facilities, etc. is granted to the building immediately adjacent to the building of this case.
(b) Attached Form 1 of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;
C. 1) The building of this case is recognized as D. Dong-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon.