비관리청 공사시행 허가수수료 부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the court of first instance concerning this case is that it is difficult to conclude that the construction work of this case constitutes a non-profit business" in the last 14th sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is also difficult to conclude that the purpose of permission for construction work of this case constitutes a non-profit business for public use or public interest purpose. In addition to adding the following judgments as to the assertion that the plaintiff emphasizes again in the trial of the court of first instance, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2
2. Additional determination
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a construction of soundproof facilities, which are accessories of roads.
Since roads are public water and road appurtenances are included in roads according to Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Road Act, the instant construction works are the construction of roads for public use, which is a nonprofit business for public use or public interest.
Therefore, Article 68(1)1 of the Road Act, which applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 103(2) of the Road Act, and Article 73(1)1(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Road Act, should be fully exempted.
B. According to Article 103(1)1 of the Road Act, when a person, other than a road management authority, files an application for permission to implement road works with a road management authority pursuant to Article 36 of the Road Act, the fee shall be paid.
On the other hand, Article 103 (2) of the Road Act provides that "Article 68 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the reduction or exemption of fees under paragraph (1). In such cases, "the occupation and use fees" shall be deemed "the fee", and Article 68 of the Road Act provides that "the road management authority may reduce or exempt the occupation and use fees, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, if the purpose of permission to occupy and use a road falls under any of the following subparagraphs, and subparagraph