beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2019.10.18 2019누2085

도로점용(주택)허가조건 위반에 따른 허가취소 통보 처분 취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court concerning the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the Defendant adds a new judgment on the following arguments emphasized by this court, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 4

2. Additional determination

A. In light of the Defendant’s assertion that the size on the building ledger of the instant road is 14.8 square meters or illegal expansion, and the actual area reaches 25.8 square meters, and that the Plaintiff’s certificate of permission to occupy and use the instant road upon entering into a lease agreement with G or cancelling the lease agreement is attached to the content-certified mail containing the contract or the intent of cancelling the contract, the right to occupy and use the instant road should also be deemed as the subject of the lease agreement.

Therefore, since it is clear that the plaintiff sublets the right to occupy and use without permission, the disposition of this case on this ground is legitimate.

B. The lease contract (No. 8’s 3 pages) prepared by the Plaintiff while leasing the instant house to G, stating the location of the leased object as “Y in Daegu-gu, Nowon-gu,” and stating only the size of 10.9m2 in the building column (the lot number assigned to the instant house is Daegu-gu E, and the size indicated in the building ledger and the register is 14.8m2, in light of the fact that the above lot number and the size indicated in the building ledger and the register of the instant house are 14.8m2, it appears that the above lot number and size appears to be clerically written). In light of the fact that the land column is a blank space, it is reasonable to view that the said lease contract was

In addition, at the time when the Plaintiff and G enter into a lease agreement as above, registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on the instant housing has been completed, and the owner of the instant housing also entered into the building ledger as D, the father of the Plaintiff who is not the Plaintiff.