지목변경반려처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 17, 2018, pursuant to Article 81 of the Spatial Data Establishment, Management, etc. Act (hereinafter “Spatial Data Management Act”), the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for land alteration (change of land category) from Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”) to “Road” from “Road” to “Road”.
(hereinafter “instant application”). (b)
On February 14, 2018, the Defendant returned the instant application to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The instant application was filed on the ground that construction works, such as changes in the form and quality of land, are completed pursuant to Article 67(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Spatial Data Construction and Management Act (hereinafter “Spatial Data Management Act”) or where the use of land or a building is changed, it may be filed and processed. As a result of reviewing the instant application, the Defendant requested supplementation on the ground that the relevant documents, such as the completion documents of the building, can not be verified, but the supplementary documents have not been received within the deadline.”
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.
The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission on May 4, 2018, but the said commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on October 22, 2018.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 7, 10, and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the land of this case was changed from February 6, 1998 to a road for a long time since it was designated as a road. Thus, the plaintiff can file an application with the plaintiff for changing the land category of the land of this case to a site pursuant to Article 67 (1) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Spatial Data Management Act.
The Defendant’s disposition of this case has a significant limitation on the Plaintiff’s exercise of property right.
The Plaintiff may suffer any disadvantage due to the instant disposition.