개발행위불허가처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On February 24, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities (hereinafter “application 1”) to create a site for access road to Incheon Strengthening-gun B, C, and D forest (hereinafter “land scheduled for access road”) and filed an application for permission to engage in development activities for building a site for detached housing for Incheon Strengthening-gun E, C, F, and G forests (hereinafter “application 2”) and for permission to engage in development activities for building a site for detached housing for H forests (hereinafter “application 3”).
On March 14, 2017, the Defendant, on the ground that “the planned site for the instant access road” is a conservation and control area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) and a mountainous district under the Mountainous Districts Management Act, which is highly sloped, included the instant valley part (hereinafter “the instant valley part”). The instant valley part constitutes an area in need of preservation for the protection of natural scenery and the prevention of disasters, as it causes a change in existing topography and is likely to cause a disaster, such as the outflow and collapse of soil and sand if access roads are established, and thus, constitutes an area in need of preservation for the protection of natural scenery and the prevention of disasters, Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning Act, Article 18 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, Article 20 of the Enforcement Decree of the Mountainous Districts Management Act, and Article 20 of the Enforcement Decree of the Mountainous Districts Management Act, denying the application
(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The land planned for the access road of this case, such as the valley part of the Plaintiff’s assertion, is unlikely to cause a disaster, such as the outflow and collapse of earth and sand, and there is no risk of causing a change in existing topography or damaging surrounding scenery even after being developed as a site for the access road.