조합설립추진위원회승인거부처분취소
1. The defendant's refusal to approve the establishment of an association against the plaintiff on April 17, 2019 shall be revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. In accordance with Article 18(2) of the former Urban Planning Act (amended by Act No. 3410, Mar. 31, 1981; hereinafter “former Urban Planning Act”), the Minister of Construction and Transportation publicly announced the Gangdong-gu Seoul Gangdong-gu Seoul apartment zone as an apartment zone (D apartment zone; hereinafter “instant apartment zone”).
B. The Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City (wholly amended by Act No. 6916, May 29, 2003; hereinafter “former Housing Construction Promotion Act”) announced the establishment and announcement of the master development plan of the apartment zone in this case pursuant to Article 20 of the former Housing Construction Promotion Act (wholly amended by Act No. 6916, May 29, 2003; hereinafter “former Housing Construction Promotion Act”). On September 15, 2005, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City announced the perusal of the master development plan of the apartment zone in this case as E, and on May 4, 2006, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City announced the modification of the master development plan to G, respectively.
C. On September 12, 2012, the Defendant determined the instant apartment zone development master plan and the instant apartment zone development master plan and the instant apartment zone improvement plan, respectively, as notified I of Gangdong-gu on October 17, 2018, and announced the topographic map. D.
On January 31, 2019, the Plaintiff obtained the consent of 1,307 owners of land, etc. (51.19%) from 2,553 owners of land, etc. to establish an association for the purpose of establishing an association for the implementation of housing reconstruction improvement project (hereinafter “instant apartment”) within three weeks of the instant apartment district, and applied for approval of the association establishment promotion committee under Article 31 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “instant application”). On April 17, 2019, the Defendant rejected the instant apartment on the ground that “the instant apartment has not undergone safety inspection under Articles 12 and 13 of the Urban Improvement Act with respect to it” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, A No. 1.