[2] In accordance with Article 8 of the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use, in a case where an administrative agency prepares a topographic map according to the designation of a region, district, etc. and installs it in a certain place, and at the same time keeps a topographic map at the place and keeps it directly accessible to the general public, whether the announcement of a topographic map is legitimate even if the topographic map itself is not included in the announcement published in the Official Gazette and the official

[2] The purpose of Article 10(5) of the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use (hereinafter “the Act on the Regulation of Land Use”) stipulating that a topographical map shall be prepared and published in principle when designating “area, district, etc.” is to ensure convenience in land use by clearly announcing the contents of restrictions on land use and restrictions on land use due to the designation of regions, districts, etc. In order to ensure predictability and transparency in administration. According to Article 10(5) of the “Guideline on the Preparation of Topographical Drawings, such as regions and districts,” the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport provides that a topographic map shall be prepared and printed in the paper of A1 (594m x 841m m) standard so that the general public can easily access the location of individual lot numbers and the restrictions on land use by lot number. Meanwhile, the Official Gazette or official bulletin is not made in the 25m x 257m m x 297m m x 297m m) or 34 (20m m x 297m m m).

1. Case summary and key issue

A. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveals the following circumstances.

1) The Plaintiff filed an application for permission to engage in development activities on August 30, 2018 with the Defendant to newly construct money on a total of 23,503 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) and three parcels, including Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-do ( Address omitted), and filed an application for a building permit on October 2, 2018.

2) The Defendant issued a disposition of refusal to grant permission on November 6, 2018 against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the instant application site was designated as an area subject to restriction on livestock raising pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Act on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta (hereinafter “the Livestock Excreta Act”), and a disposition of refusal to grant permission on November 8, 2018.”

3) Meanwhile, as the former Ordinance on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta (amended by Ordinance No. 2602, Apr. 17, 2019; hereinafter “instant Ordinance”) was enacted on July 10, 2017 by Hongcheon-gun Ordinance No. 2527, the Defendant prepared a topographic map stating that the instant application area is included in a new livestock breeding restriction area. On January 24, 2018, the Defendant made a public announcement on the change in the topographic map restriction area for raising the livestock of Hongcheon-gun (No. 2018-43 of the Hongcheon-gun Notice) (No. 2018-13 of the Hongcheon-gun Notice) and published it on February 13, 2018. Although the topographical map itself was not stated in the notice, it was stored in the environment sanitation and real estate system of the Hongcheon-gun Office, and entered it in the hm/N information system.

B. The key issue of the instant case is whether a notice of topographic drawings was lawful in relation to the validity of designation of a livestock raising-restricted zone under Article 8(1) of the Livestock Excreta Act.

2. Relevant provisions and legal principles

A. Article 8(1) of the Livestock Excreta Act provides that the head of a Si/Gun/Gu may designate and publicly announce a certain area as prescribed by municipal ordinance of the relevant local government to restrict livestock raising in an area deemed necessary to restrict livestock raising in order to conserve the living environment of local residents or to preserve the quality of water sources. According to the delegation, Article 3 of the instant Ordinance provides that the head of the Gun shall designate a restricted area for livestock raising as prescribed in attached Table 1 pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Livestock Excreta Act, and shall publicly notify the designation of the restricted area for livestock raising as prescribed in attached Table 1 (Article 8(1). (2) of the Act provides that livestock excreta raising and discharge facilities may not be installed in a restricted area for livestock excreta (attached Table 1); subparagraph 3(d) of the attached Table 3 provides that “the housing or medical facilities, education and research facilities, elderly facilities, training facilities, accommodation facilities, tourist resting facilities, facilities for raising livestock, land and forest areas adjacent to the boundary of livestock excreta discharge facilities in a size exceeding 100,00 square meters”

Meanwhile, the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use (hereinafter “the Act on the Regulation of Land Use”) defines “area, district, zone, zone, zone, complex, urban or Gun planning facility, regardless of its name, and subject to the authorization, permission, etc. related to land use” as “area, district, etc.” (Article 2 subparag. 1). Article 8 of the Livestock Excreta Act defines “area, district, etc. subject to restrictions on the use and preservation of land” as “area, district, district, etc.” (Article 5 subparag. 1 [Attachment]. And Article 5 subparag. 1] of the Act on the Regulation of Land Use provides that “area, district, etc. subject to the Act on the Regulation of Land Use where there are provisions different from those of Article 8 of the Act on the Regulation of Land Use in other Acts on the designation and operation, etc. of area, district, district, etc. (Article 3); where the head of a central administrative agency designates area, district, etc., it shall prepare and publicly notify a topographical map on the topographical map indicating the land register in the Official gazette, and publicly notify it in principle (Article 8(3).

In full view of the above provisions, in order to restrict livestock raising pursuant to the Livestock Excreta Act, the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall, in principle, designate a certain area as an area where livestock raising is restricted as prescribed by municipal ordinances and prepare and publicly announce topographic maps as prescribed by the Land Use Regulation Act, and it is reasonable to deem that the designation of a zone where livestock raising is restricted prior to the preparation and public announcement of such topographic maps does not take effect (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Du10489, May 11, 2017)

B. The purport of the Land Use Regulation Act, in principle, requires the preparation and public announcement of topographic maps when designating “area, district, etc.” is to promote convenience in land use and ensure predictability and transparency in administration by clearly announcing the contents of land subject to restrictions on land use due to the designation of area, district, etc. In this context, pursuant to Article 10(5) of the Guidelines on the Preparation of Topographical Drawings in the Area, Districts, etc., the topographical maps are to be prepared and printed out on the paper of A1 (594m x 841m x 841m) so that the general public can easily access the location of individual lot numbers and the restrictions on land use by lot number in the Official Gazette. Meanwhile, the Official Gazette or public announcement is difficult to contain topographic maps as they are by being made on the standard of B5 (182m x 257m x 297m x 297m) or A4 (20m x m x 297m m).

3. Determination as to the instant case

A. Examining the facts in light of the aforementioned legal principles, even if the Defendant, on January 24, 2018, included the instant application site in a new livestock raising restriction zone, published a notice on the modification of a topographical map in a restricted area for raising livestock of Hongcheon-gun (No. 2018-43 of the Hongcheon-gun Notice) and did not contain a topographic map itself in the notice on February 13, 2018, if the topographical map was kept in the environment sanitation and office of the Hongcheon-gun Office and kept it in a state in which the general public can access directly, the notification of the topographic map should be deemed lawful.

B. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the designation of a new livestock breeding restriction zone was not effective because the Defendant did not lawfully publish a topographic map, insofar as the Defendant did not record the topographic map itself in the Hongcheon Military Newsletter, and thus, the instant application area was included in the new livestock breeding restriction zone. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the notification of a topographic map, thereby failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The Defendant’

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Ki-taik (Presiding Justice)