도시관리계획입안미반영처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From January 1, 1995, the Plaintiff was running the high-pressure gas production charging business in Kimpo-si B, Kimpo-si, and on July 6, 2018, the Plaintiff drafted an urban management plan (facilities: gas supply facilities) pursuant to Article 26 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) to install gas supply facilities (hereinafter “instant facilities”) on the land outside Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and two lots (hereinafter “instant project site”).
(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)
On October 8, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition to return the proposal (hereinafter “instant disposition”) for the following reasons after consultation with the Kimpo-si Urban Planning Committee on October 15, 2018.
1. Inappropriate location - The location of facilities proposed to an area where major facilities or buildings are concentrated pursuant to Article 71 of the Rules on the Standards for Determination, Structure and Establishment of Urban or Gun Planning Facilities is not located in an area where major facilities or buildings are concentrated, the relevant area's day members are concentrated of buildings, such as factories, and the scale of facilities proposed to an area where new neighborhood living facilities are being built shall be inappropriate
2. Safety measures for the danger of proposed facilities are insufficient, unreasonable vehicle traffic system and conflict resolution following the filing of civil petitions by neighboring residents - safety lack of safety measures for improper placement of facilities and surrounding areas, unreasonable vehicle entry system and internal wire system, etc. - Civil petitions filed for reasons, such as danger in the location of facilities and anticipated property damage from neighboring residents, and it is difficult to formulate and reflect them at the present time due to the expiration of conflict resolution.
C. The Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant on December 11, 2018 pursuant to Article 35(1) of the Civil Petitions Treatment Act, but the said application on December 20, 2018.