의정부고산지구 이주대책대상자 부적격처분취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Defendant is the executor of the Gu Government-A public housing zone development project (hereinafter “instant project”), and the Plaintiff is the owner of the Gu Government-si 2nd floor C’s detached housing located within the instant project area (hereinafter “instant housing”).
B. The defendant has established and implemented relocation measures pursuant to Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects, and the criteria for selecting those eligible to be supplied with the housing site for migrants are as follows:
The owners of unauthorized buildings, corporations, and organizations are excluded from the owners of unauthorized buildings, corporations, and organizations since January 25, 1989, who owned and continuously resided in a permitted house within a project district from one year before the base date (the date of public announcement of district designation, October 9, 2006) to the date of conclusion of the compensation contract or the date of adjudication of expropriation.
C. After receiving the adjudication of expropriation on May 18, 2016 on the instant housing, the Plaintiff applied for the selection of himself/herself as a person subject to supply of the said housing site on October 10, 2016. However, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that he/she was excluded from the selection because he/she did not meet the selection requirements prescribed by the relevant statutes on October 27, 2016 (hereinafter “instant first disposition”), and (2) May 15, 2017. Meanwhile, the Defendant withdrawn the assertion that he/she did not meet the housing requirements in the preparatory document as of October 23, 2017.
and on the ground that it does not meet the requirements of residence, the non-conformity was made.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant Disposition 2”). 【No ground for recognition” Nos. 1, 3, 7, 8, and 10 (including spot numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion Nos. 1 and 2 of the instant case should be revoked on the grounds that all of the grounds delineated below are unlawful.
1. The Defendant did not present a specific basis and reason for the disposition No. 1 of this case.