주택재개발조합설립추진위원회승인반려처분무효확인
1. The Defendant’s disposition on April 4, 201 against the Plaintiff is null and void.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 26, 2007, Gyeonggi-do publicly notified B of Gyeonggi-do, designated the area of 670,559 square meters in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, Dawon 657,849 square meters as the urban renewal acceleration district of Nam-si, Namyang-si, and determined the alteration of the urban renewal acceleration district and the renewal acceleration plan. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 22348, Aug. 2, 2010>
B. On February 28, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that, in order to implement a housing redevelopment project for the area of 197,009 square meters (A; hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) of the Namyang-si in the said urban renewal acceleration zone, the consent rate of 864 of the owners of land, etc. reaches 52.11% with the consent of 1,658 owners of land, etc., and submitted an application for approval of the Establishment Promotion Committee along with the consent and relevant documents, etc. to the Defendant.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant application”). C.
However, on April 4, 2011, the Defendant rejected the instant application on the ground that the Plaintiff did not explicitly indicate several names of the owners of land, etc. calculated by the Defendant, and those who agreed thereto, on the ground that “The instant application is reviewed in accordance with the relevant statutes and guidelines for the performance of maintenance and improvement projects (No. 55 of the Rules of the Namyang City; hereinafter “instant guidelines”), and that the consent rate does not reach a majority.”
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
On February 1, 2012, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to disclose the list of the owners of land, etc. or the number thereof as of the time the instant application was received. The Defendant, on February 2, 2012, disclosed the review report as of April 4, 201, which was examined by the Defendant at the time of the instant application to the Plaintiff. This stated, stating, “The number of owners of land, etc. in the instant rearrangement zone is 1,67 added nine persons compared to the instant application, and the number of consenters is 832 persons except for 32 written consent, and the consent rate is 49.91%.”
Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, evidence A No. 1-2, A.