재산세부과처분 등 취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the part added or added below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
At the second and second bottom of the judgment of the first instance, the term “five preceding” is added to the term “former Bogeumjari Housing Act.”
From 3 to 7 pages of the first instance judgment, “The completion date of land creation works has not been completed” shall be read as “the land creation works were completed on June 30, 2018 as scheduled.”
The "the first instance court" shall be added in front of the "Korea Land and Housing Corporation" in the fourth 6th of the judgment of the first instance.
The fifth and seventh pages of the judgment of the court of first instance added the phrase “as of January 27, 2016,” “as of May 29, 2017.”
(n) From 8 pages to 9 12 pages under the 8th judgment of the first instance (n) shall be made as follows:
⑤ The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Korea Land and Housing Corporation issued a written consent to land use of each of the instant land to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation on January 27, 2016 and May 29, 2017, and that each of the instant land does not constitute “land before obtaining permission for use by starting land creation works to be used as land annexed to a building” in the instant comprehensive provision.
However, in full view of the following circumstances, the above evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the fact-finding results of this court's fact-finding to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, it is difficult to view that each of the lands of this case does not constitute "land before obtaining permission for use after starting land creation work to use it as land annexed to a building under the overall provision of this case." Thus, the defendant's assertion on this part is without merit.
The permission for completion inspection or use of land creation works referred to in the overall title of this case shall be granted to the person who has the authority to designate and approve the project.