beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.04.20 2016구합67950

주택특별공급대상자제외처분 및 생활대책제외처분 취소

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

(b) Type of supply, neighborhood living facilities, and the letter of this case by a commercial store: (a) person who has been engaged in the business, agriculture, or livestock farming in the relevant business district from before the base date to the date the first compensation begins; (b) has owned the building for store or factory for which approval for use has been obtained under Article 22 of the Building Act in the business district from before the base date to the date the first compensation begins;

3. Residential measures 1) In the event that a person owns a store or factory building for which approval for use has been granted under Article 22 of the Building Act within the relevant project district from the base date of the supply size of the commercial store (on June 29, 2004) to the relevant project district and requires permission, license, report, etc. under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, he/she is registered as a business operator under the Value-Added Tax Act and engages directly in business activities from the relevant building until the first compensation commencement date, and is removed from the relevant building according to the relevant project; * A person subject to compulsory removal and a project operator after the date (on April 15, 2014, 200) the relocation of the supply price of the commercial building in the same floor as the supply price of the commercial building in the same floor area (hereinafter referred to as the average successful bid price per square meter of the same floor) before consultation and/or the base date of the supply size of the commercial building site (including free-use business permit) by the first 200 days prior to the commencement date of compensation.

3. This.