건축허가신청반려처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition of rejecting an application for building permit filed against the Plaintiff on June 27, 2019 is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On April 29, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application for a building permit for the construction of medical facilities (convalescent hospitals) and Class I neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “facilities of this case”) (hereinafter “instant application”) (hereinafter “instant application”).
B. On June 27, 2019, the Defendant rendered a disposition rejecting the instant application on the ground that “the land designated and managed as a land for expansion plan in accordance with the reasonable sewerage maintenance master plan for which a building permit is applied, and the site location of an individual facility, such as construction in the planned site, is limited to the site for the expansion project” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
(c)
The Plaintiff filed an administrative adjudication seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Chungcheong Administrative Trial Committee, but was dismissed on September 17, 2019.
[Grounds for recognition] The items in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion of this case should be revoked because the disposition of this case is erroneous as follows.
1) Since a building permit is an act belonging to a flag, a building permit must be granted insofar as it does not go against the relevant laws and regulations, such as the Building Act, and the application for permission shall not be rejected for reasons other than those prescribed by such relevant laws and regulations, even if there is no need for significant
In the case of the application of this case, there is no relevant law that restricts the construction, and there is no ground to view it as deviating from the relevant law.
Nevertheless, the Defendant rejected the instant application on the ground that the instant land is a site for the extension plan for sewage treatment facilities without legal basis.
2) While the public interest to achieve the instant disposition is not significant, the instant disposition violates the principle of proportionality, since the damage that the Plaintiff would incur and the infringement of the welfare of the residents is considerably significant.
(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;
(c)
Judgment
1) Relevant legal principles.