민간투자사업 제안서 반려처분 취소
1. On June 19, 2014, the Defendant’s disposition to return a proposal for a public-private partnership project against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 22, 2014, the Plaintiff submitted a project proposal (hereinafter “instant project proposal”) to propose that the Defendant implement the new project of the Seoul-Seoul-Seoul-Seoul-Seoul Highway (Seoul-Seoul Highway; hereinafter “instant Highway”) by means of private investment.
B. On June 19, 2014, the Defendant returned the Plaintiff’s instant project proposal on the ground that “the instant project to build the Highway was not determined at the present point of time on the method and time of promotion.”
(hereinafter “instant return disposition”). C.
On September 13, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed to the Central Administrative Appeals Commission, but the Central Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said request on June 9, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 3 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the return disposition of this case is legitimate
A. The parties’ assertion 1) If the Plaintiff’s private sector proposes a project promotion by means of private investment, the competent authority shall be the Act on Private Participation in Infrastructure (hereinafter “Private Investment Act”).
(2) In accordance with Article 9 and Article 7(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where the above proposal satisfies the formal requirements and is deemed consistent with the statutes and the policies of the competent authority, prior to determining whether to implement the proposed project, the Director of the PIMAC shall request the Director of the PIMAC to review the pertinent proposal and determine whether to adopt the proposal based on his opinion, but the Defendant issued a return disposition of this case without carrying out the above procedure on the instant proposal, and thus, the above disposition is unlawful in violation of the relevant statutes. (2) Whether to implement the construction of the instant highway at the time of the instant rejection disposition by the Defendant, and the time of the determination is not specifically determined.