전기사업(태양광발전소) 불허가처분취소
1. Non-permission regarding the Defendant’s application for electric utility (solar power generation) against the Plaintiff on March 5, 2019.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 30, 2019, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for the electric utility license with the content indicated below.
Plaintiff
The installation method of 499.80kW from the date fixed type of installation: 12 months from the date fixed type of installation: 380V facility capacity: 49.80kW from the date fixed type of installation: 480V facility capacity: 499.80kW installation method: 12 months from the date fixed type of installation
B. On March 5, 2019, the Defendant rejected the said application against the Plaintiffs on the following grounds (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).
Non-conformity with the provisions of Article 18-2 of the Urban Planning Ordinance of Goeung-gun noncompliant with the criteria for permission - H and I recently adjacent houses and 500 meters wide, but most of the applications are located within 500 meters [based on recognition], without any dispute, each entry in Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The plaintiffs' assertion
A. Article 18(3) of the Urban Planning Ordinance (hereinafter “instant Ordinance provision”) provides for permission to engage in development activities, and each of the instant dispositions against the Plaintiffs’ refusal to file an application for permission to engage in the electricity business based thereon is unlawful.
B. The instant ordinances are null and void by deviating from the level of delegation or delegation without delegation by superior laws and regulations, and each of the instant dispositions based thereon is unlawful.
C. Each of the instant dispositions was abused and deviates from discretionary authority.
3. Attached statements to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;
4. The plaintiffs' application for the permission of the electricity business by the plaintiffs as to the legitimacy of the disposition is related to the permission of the electricity business under Article 7 (1) of the Electric Utility Act. Thus, the defendant is required to determine whether to grant the permission in accordance with the permission standards set by Article 7 (5) of the same Act, and the permission of the development to conduct the business