건축신고수리 불허가처분취소
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 April 4, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a building permit, including permission for development activities, to build a Dong and plant-related facility of 1,230 square meters of building area and total floor area on the ground of 5,769 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”).
(hereinafter “instant application”). In accordance with Article 59 (Deliberation by Urban Planning Committee on Development Activities) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) and Article 57 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the urban planning deliberation conducted pursuant to the provisions of Article 59 (Deliberation by Urban Planning Committee on Development Activities) of the same Act and Article 57 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, “D-water source protection and clean air zone, which may cause damage to good farmland,” and there is a concern that the environmental rights of the relevant residents may be infringed if a chain shed is constructed after the initial stable permission. The instant application falls under an agricultural and forest area for conservation purposes pursuant to Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and development activities shall be restricted pursuant to Article 58 (Standards for Permission for Development Activities) of the same Act and
(b).
On August 5, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition to refuse the instant application for the following reasons to the Plaintiff on August 5, 2019.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). 【The ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. Considering the following circumstances of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the instant disposition is unlawful by abusing its discretionary power, as it is either arbitrary judgment or violates the principle of equality and proportionality.
1) The instant application belongs to the Agricultural Promotion Zone, and according to Article 76(5) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the Farmland Act applies to the instant application located within the Agricultural Promotion Zone. However, the former Farmland Act (amended by Act No. 11, Feb. 11, 2020).