액화석유가스충전사업허가신청불허가처분취소
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The Defendant’s liquefied petroleum gas filling business against the Plaintiff on September 27, 2012.
1. Details of the disposition;
2. Whether the rejection disposition of this case is legitimate
A. The plaintiff's assertion
B. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on each of the above parts is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of
C. 1) In order to realize the purpose of a civil petition as to the legitimacy of the first disposition, permission, authorization, recommendation, consultation, confirmation, etc. by multiple related agencies pursuant to relevant statutes, etc. (hereinafter “authorization and permission”).
In the case of complex civil petitions subject to authorization and permission, even where one of them does not file a blanket application for authorization and permission, and only one of them is applied, if the relevant statutes invokes the provisions on authorization and permission under other Acts and subordinate statutes, or if it is obvious that the act is absolutely prohibited by other Acts and subordinate statutes to realize it objectively impossible (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du8766, Mar. 24, 2000). In light of these legal principles, the public health class and the Plaintiff obtained land transaction permission from the Defendant on Nov. 16, 201 as “for agricultural cultivation” on the instant land, which is located within a development restriction zone under the Development Restriction Act and falls within a land transaction permission zone under the National Land Planning Act, and as at September 19, 2012, which is the date of application for permission, and as at September 27, 2012, the pertinent land was not used for any purpose other than the purpose of permission.
However, since Article 118(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act intends to modify the permitted purpose of use, where it is possible to modify the purpose of use of the land in this case according to such procedures, the standard under Article 4(1)6 of the Commercialization Petroleum Act is satisfied merely because the period of compulsory use of the land in this case has not elapsed at the