원주 태장2지구 도시개발구역지정(변경) 등
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
The court's explanation of this case by the court of the first instance as to this case is the same as the ground for the judgment of the first instance except for the following additional parts. Thus, this case is quoted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of
In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that the amendment of this case was unlawful on the grounds of various circumstances while serving in the trial. However, considering its arguments, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the amendment of this case was unlawful on the grounds of the first instance court’s ruling, the Plaintiff’s assertion related to the illegality of the first public notice is not sufficient to determine differently by the court in light of the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit as stated in the first instance judgment, or is not clear as to whether the amendment of this case’s public notice was unlawful on the sole basis of its assertion, such as the assertion related to a disposition separate from the public notice of this case’s modification, etc.
Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.