공동주택신축 등 불허가처분취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff makes an additional or supplementary judgment as follows with respect to the assertion that the plaintiff contests in the court of first instance. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article
The defendant's assertion that the addition or supplementary decision was made on the ground that "the defendant rejected the permission of development activities (the ground for rejection of the result of deliberation by the fourth Urban Planning Deliberation Committee) which is an agenda item for permission of construction pursuant to Article 16 and Article 11 (5) of the Building Act."
Therefore, the Defendant’s grounds for non-permission include not only “influence”, “influent type of complex”, “influent form or form change after permission”, but also “influent with the standards for permission for development acts” and “influent with the standards for permission for farmland diversion
However, the scale of the instant multi-family housing is 1,782.47 square meters in the building area (existing building permit: 549.36 square meters), 8,149.8 square meters in total (existing building permit: 2,280.24 square meters), 3 Dong (two existing building permit), 48 households (existing building permit: 16 households), 4 above ground (same 4 stories), 11.4 meters in height (existing building permit: 15 meters in height). The instant multi-family housing is not in harmony with the actual status of land use in surrounding areas, environment, and landscape. If the instant multi-family housing is constructed, it is anticipated that agricultural management would be impeded by frequent entry of vehicles from residents, and that serious damage to public interest would occur.
Therefore, the instant application is deemed to have failed to meet the criteria for permission for development activities or the criteria for permission for diversion of farmland, and thus, it cannot be said that there was an error of deviation or abuse of discretionary authority.
The Ordinance on Urban Planning of Jeonju-si on February 28, 2018 shall be the Ordinance of the Jeonju-si, Jeollabuk-do.