개발부담금부과처분취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition and addition to the stated reasoning, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts V through VI of the Judgment of the court of first instance concerning the height shall be as follows:
Domins, Nos. 6 and 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)
According to the statement, the plaintiffs entered into a sales contract on the land of this case with Dongdong Construction on July 15, 2009. The plaintiffs' cost of development on the invoice submitted by the plaintiffs was calculated as development cost of Drote 1,611,485,376 won, and 2,178,204,485 won on Erote, and among them, it is recognized that the costs of earth construction and structure construction were included.
However, the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the fact-finding conducted with respect to Gap evidence Nos. 8 through 18, Eul evidence Nos. 12 through 26, and the fact-finding conducted with the Korea Industrial Planning Institute, an incorporated association of the court of first instance, the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, (i) each cost stated in the construction cost calculation statement is calculated by applying the government standard pumsem in accordance with the standards for the estimated price of contract established by the Ministry of Strategy and Finance; (ii) the volume of the above earth and structure construction is not a housing site preparation project, but a building construction project; and (iii) the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract for the land of this case with the Dongdong Construction on July 15, 2009, but the housing construction project of this case was commenced on or around June 1, 2011 after obtaining the approval of the business plan for the housing construction project of this case; and (iii) each cost in the construction cost calculation statement was not completely flatized with the ground structure of this case.