beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.01.17 2018구합11661

건축(개발행위 허가 포함) 불허가 처분 취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 30, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities and a building permit for new construction of animal and plant-related facilities with a total floor area of 2,950 square meters on the ground of four lots, including the land B in Gyeyang-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On March 27, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the non-permission of construction (including permission for development activities) for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Under Article 58 (3) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter referred to as the “National Land Planning Act”), an application for non-consultation on permission for development activities (hereinafter referred to as “Non-consultation on development activities”) shall take into account the characteristics of a region, development status of a region, current status of infrastructure, etc. under Article 58 (3) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter referred to as the “National Land Planning Act”), and the construction of a new stable shall be restricted as a result of damaging the surrounding natural scenery and aesthetic view of a building constructed at the time of a new construction of a rain shed in accordance with the relationship with a neighboring area under Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and attached Table 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. In addition, as the relevant area is an agricultural and forest area, where the standards for permission for development activities may be strengthened and applied through deliberation by the urban planning committee under Article 59 of the same Act, and its location, feasibility, impact of development on the environment, the development of scenery, and the mitigation of damage to the surrounding area, but no environmental pollution or damage, etc.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion of this case.