주거이전비등
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part which added or added some of the following, thereby citing this case as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The following shall be added between 6th 10 lines and 11 lines among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance:
The plaintiff asserts that the third floor of the building of this case was changed to the first-class neighborhood living facility to use it as a regional children's center, but it does not actually change the building or its inside, etc. and continued to use it as a house as originally used as a changed local children's center.
According to the evidence Nos. 4 and 4, the plaintiff applied for the alteration of the purpose of use to Class I neighborhood living facilities (local children's centers) in the instant building on October 16, 2009, and obtained permission for alteration of the purpose of use on October 27, 2009. Thus, barring any special circumstance, barring any evidence, it is reasonable to view that the third floor of the instant building was physically changing the purpose of use from the housing to Class I neighborhood living facilities (regional children's centers) and obtained approval for alteration of the purpose of use on October 27, 2009.
The plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.
Among the reasons in the judgment of the court of first instance, the parts from 4 to 7.6 pages on the 6th shall be dried as follows:
2) The former Enforcement Decree of the Land Compensation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28806, Apr. 17, 2018); Article 40(3)2(e) of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28806, Apr. 17, 2018) regarding Chapter 2,