이주자택지공급대상자 제외처분취소
1. On August 13, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition to exclude the Plaintiff from those subject to supply of unsettled housing sites is revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On September 30, 2009, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs designated a large scale, including Daegu-gun District B, as a C National Industrial Complex Development Project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”), and publicly announced the approval of the instant project development plan and implementation plan with the intent of the project implementer as the defendant (public notification D).
Guidance on application for migration and livelihood measures;
2. A person who has owned a house in the district continuously from before the date of designation of the industrial complex subject to the classification of relocation measures ( September 30, 2009) to the date of conclusion of the compensation contract (or the date of adjudication of expropriation) and resided in the house, and emigrateed due to the implementation of this project after receiving compensation for the house from our construction;
(i) An owner of an unauthorized building, a corporation, or an organization that has not been supplied after January 25, 1989;
One parcel for one household (or two or more houses owned by the same household which share the same household), less basic facilities installation expenses under the Land Compensation Act (or more than 265 square meters per piece of land) from the cost of creating the supply of one parcel of land (supply of one parcel of land, if the same household owns two or more houses) (or
B. In accordance with Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) and Article 40 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Defendant established measures for resettlement and livelihood (hereinafter “the relocation measures of this case”) on behalf of the persons who lose their base of livelihood as a result of the provision of residential buildings by implementing the project in this case.
C. Around August 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she had resided in Daegu-gun E and F ground second-class housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) included in the instant project district, while owning it, and filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of the Defendant as a person eligible for the supply of the migrants’ housing site.
(A) No. 4. D.
Accordingly, the defendant on August 13, 2014, on the ground that the requirements for ownership and the requirements for residence have not been met.