beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.11.08 2018구합2902

용도변경 허가 거부처분 취소

Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 19, 2017, the Plaintiff and the rest of the designated parties indicated in the list of the designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiff, etc.”) filed an application with the Defendant for the alteration of the use of “a dance hall” from “a second class neighborhood living facility (a dance hall) for an underground floor of 492.33 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) among the buildings located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (the second class floor and the seventh floor), pursuant to Article 16 of the Building Act, etc.

Pursuant to Article 74 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 32 of the Urban Planning Ordinance, the relevant parcel shall not be constructed or changed for the purpose of amusement facilities in an area within 50 meters from the boundary of a residential area pursuant to the C district unit planning (Public Notice D of Seoul Special Metropolitan City).

B. On December 21, 2017, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff, etc.’s change of use in accordance with Article 76(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”), Article 71 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning Act”), and Article 32 of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Urban Planning (hereinafter “Ordinance on Urban Planning”) on the following grounds:

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) Since the “quasi-residential area” stipulated in Article 30 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act that is not a residential area cannot be considered as a “residential area”, even if a quasi-residential area exists within 50 meters from the instant real estate, the purpose of use can be changed to an amusement facility (a dance hall). (ii) An area adjacent to the instant real estate within 50 meters from the instant real estate in violation of the principle