beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2016.09.22 2016구합50274

변상금부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 13, 2010, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of 281m2, 281m2, 3rd floor, 281m2, 281m2, and 207m2 in the underground room (hereinafter “instant leisure building”) on the ground of inheritance due to the consultation division on February 13, 201.

B. The land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”) is managed as administrative property in the same name until the date on which Gangwon-do completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of succession from Gangnam-si on March 26, 1991, by purchasing 2,712/2,869 shares of the instant land around June 8, 1982, and managing it as administrative property in the school site of B elementary school from the previous Gangseo-si, Gangwon-do around June 8, 1982, by acquiring 2,712/2,869 shares of the instant land.

C. However, the wall of the instant building (hereinafter “the wall of this case”) is installed in a 266 square meters of the instant land (hereinafter “the occupied part”). D.

On November 30, 2015, the Defendant imposed indemnity of KRW 5,294,860 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied the instant part of the instant wall without permission.

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition with the Gangwon-do Educational Administrative Appeals Commission, and the Gangwon-do Educational Administrative Appeals Commission made a decision on March 3, 2016 to reduce the indemnity amount to KRW 5,005,100.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”), which remains after the reduction, on November 30, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). 【In the absence of any dispute, the ground for recognition”, “A evidence Nos. 1, 2, 2, and 1 of the evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion was newly constructed, the instant fenced the instant land from the time when the instant female building was newly constructed. As to the instant female building and its site, the instant fence was a stock company on June 27, 1984.