교통유발부담금부과처분 취소청구의 소
1. The Defendant’s imposition of traffic inducement charges of KRW 44,380,420 against the Plaintiff on October 5, 2015 is revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On August 18, 1983, the Plaintiff was a public corporation established for the purpose of laying the foundation for a long-term stable supply of gas. From October 1996, the Plaintiff commenced the operation and management of the Incheon Production Base located at KRW 960, as the Incheon Yeonsu-gu New Port (hereinafter “instant base”).
B. The instant base has a storage tank of about 448,00 square meters with a total site area of about 448,00 square meters, and gas storage facilities with a 100,000 Dual 10,00 Dual 10,140 Dual 2,200 Dual 200,200 Dual 200,00 Dual 200 (total 20 mal) and the site area corresponding to
(hereinafter referred to as “instant storage tank” in the entirety of the storage tanks.
On September 7, 2015, the Inspector General of Incheon Metropolitan City carried out the "consulting audit of traffic inducement charges" against the defendant, and pointed out that "the defendant imposed traffic inducement charges only on the portion other than the storage of this case on the base of this case and did not impose traffic inducement charges on the storage of this case."
On October 5, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing charges for causing traffic congestion amounting to KRW 44,338,420 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). From August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) determined the amount imposed as KRW 87,165.25 square meters; (b) the amount imposed as KRW 87,165.25 square meters; and (c) the amount to be reduced as KRW 34,837,334; and (d) imposed the charges for causing traffic congestion on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
On November 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition with the Defendant, but the Defendant, on December 3, 2015, dismissed the instant disposition, and the Plaintiff filed a motion to revoke the instant disposition with the Incheon Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on March 2, 2016, but on April 25, 2016, the said commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for revocation (hereinafter “instant ruling”).
[Based on recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 3, and all pleadings.