건축허가불허가처분취소
1. On May 29, 2017, the Defendant’s revocation of the provisional injunction against each of the Plaintiffs.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
Details of the disposition
The Plaintiffs filed an application for a building permit with the Defendant to newly build or extend animal and plant-related facilities (a stable) as listed below:
(2) The Defendant newly constructed the instant Ordinance on May 17, 2017, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff’s application site was located in the area of the instant application; and (b) the same does not apply to the instant application; and (c) on April 20, 2017, the size of the building site for which the Plaintiff’s application was filed; and (d) the instant Ordinance on the Construction and Management of Livestock Excreta No. 1,925 newly constructed on May 19, 2017, and 1,925, Dasan-si, and 1,925, Dasan-si, and 1,925, newly constructed on May 23, 2017, Dasan-si, J 2,004.481 newly constructed on May 17, 2017, and newly constructed the instant Ordinance on the Construction Permission No. 14, 2751 E. 1, May 22, 2017.
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case’s Disposition”). [Grounds for recognition] did not dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 5, 7 through 9 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s evidence Nos. 6, and Eul’s overall purport of the Disposition in this case’s disposition is legitimate. The Defendant asserted that the disposition in this case’s disposition in accordance with the pre-announcement of legislation of this case’s Ordinance, which was pre-announcementd on March 30, 2017, “the restricted area for raising livestock from the residential smuggling area up to 200 meters to 300 meters”, and the Plaintiffs filed the instant application to build livestock pens in the instant case’s application area that does not fall under the restricted area for raising livestock under the pre-announcement of legislation as above.
However, on May 19, 2017 without undergoing a separate pre-announcement procedure, the Asan City Council passed a resolution on the amendment to the effect that the livestock breeding restriction area is “1,000 meters away from the residential congested area”, and the Defendant promulgated it on May 25, 2017, and thereafter, the application price of this case against the Plaintiffs.