이주대책대상거부처분취소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant house (hereinafter “instant house”) located on the Busan Gangseo-gu land E (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant is the implementer of the Busan Gangseo-gu Development Project for Free Economic Zone D (hereinafter “instant project”) in Busan Gangseo-gu, Busan, which is promoted in a daily area of 34,482,827 square meters, including the instant land.
B. On October 30, 2003, the Minister of Finance and Economy designated and announced B as a free economic zone the Busan Gangseo-gu and the Jinhae-si (former Changwon-si) as the Busan Gangseo-gu under Article 4 of the Act on Designation and Management of Free Economic Zones, and the Minister of Knowledge Economy approved the modification of the development plan and the implementation plan for the project in this case and announced it on December 31, 2008.
C. On August 14, 2009, the Defendant publicly announced a compensation plan for the contents that “the owner of the instant building without permission after January 25, 1989) owned and continuously resided in the instant building within the instant project zone from the date of designation and public notification of the instant project ( October 30, 2003) to the date of conclusion of the compensation contract or the date of adjudication of expropriation, and the person who moved to the instant building upon receiving compensation for the said house from the Defendant (excluding the owner of the building without permission after January 25, 1989)” as the object of the relocation measures for the instant
On April 21, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a compensation agreement with the Defendant to compensate for the obstacles to the instant house, etc. at KRW 25,812,100 (hereinafter “instant compensation agreement”).
E. Since then, the Plaintiff applied for the selection of the Defendant as a person eligible for the relocation measures of the instant project, the Defendant, on September 6, 2013, did not construct the instant house before January 24, 1989, but determined that the Plaintiff was an unauthorized building newly constructed after January 25, 1989 (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and notified the Plaintiff thereof.
[Reasons for Recognition]