beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2021.01.13 2020누39244

도로사용료 부과처분취소 청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasons why this part of the disposition is used by the court are as follows: (a) the reasons why the judgment of the court of first instance is based on the same part of the reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance (including the forest in attached Form 1); (b) Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act; and (c) Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The judgment of the court of first instance (attached Form 2) of the relevant statutes is as stated in the relevant statutes.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The reasoning for the use of this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows, except for the dismissal of the corresponding part as follows, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, this part is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part of the first instance judgment from 3th to 4th 1th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth.

1) The road occupation and use fees of this case are imposed on the road. (1) The road of this case, from around 2005 to around H, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and the road of this case, was planned to enter the building of this case for the convenience of both parties to the building of this case. The road of this case includes the installation expenses of the road of this case as the sales price paid to G by both parties to the building of this case.

Therefore, G Corporation may waive the exclusive and exclusive right to use the instant road by having the Plaintiff and the parties of the instant building use the instant road free of charge after constructing the instant road on the premise that both the Plaintiff and the parties of the instant building use the instant road without compensation.

However, since the Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant road, for which the exercise of exclusive use and profit-making rights was waived from G Corporation around December 2014, the Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant road, the instant road user, etc. who can use the instant road free of charge.