장기미집행도시계획시설결정해제입안신청 거부처분취소청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B forest No. 21,090 square meters, C forest No. 558 square meters, D forest No. 613 square meters, E forest No. 1,452 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “each of the above land”), and the Defendant is delegated by the administrative agency with the authority to formulate urban planning facilities (excluding the construction of railroads and tracks) and to process resident proposals for the formulation thereof by the head of the Seoul Metropolitan Government pursuant to Article 68(1) of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Urban Planning.
B. On July 14, 197, as F on July 14, 197, the construction department announcement was determined and publicly announced as a park (the name of the project: H Park creation project; hereinafter “instant park creation project”) which is an urban planning facility and urban planning facility (hereinafter “instant urban planning facility determination”).
C. On February 7, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the cancellation of the determination of the long-term unexecution urban planning facilities (hereinafter “instant application”) seeking the cancellation of the determination of the instant urban planning facilities pursuant to Article 48-2(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) on the ground that the instant park construction project for each of the instant land was not implemented.
On February 22, 2017, the Defendant issued a notice to the Plaintiff that “each of the instant land was established by the time the determination of the instant urban planning facilities became effective.” As such, the Defendant did not constitute the subject of the application for cancellation under Article 48-2 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 4, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 5, 6, and 14 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;
3. Determination on the defense prior to the merits
A. The defendant has the right to formulate an urban management plan concerning each of the instant lands.