건축허가 불허처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for a construction permit with the purport of newly constructing a site area of 1,166 square meters, a building area of 408.35 square meters, and a second-story accommodation (hereinafter “instant accommodation”) on the ground of 2,025 square meters of B forest and fields (hereinafter “instant application site”).
B. On September 9, 2016, the Defendant rendered a non-permission of construction permit (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the following grounds.
As the planned management area where the application for attention is filed is a planned management area, there may be concerns over safety, such as the access roads to fire vehicles and motor vehicles at the time of a fire, and the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter referred to as the “National Land Planning Act”) on September 1, 2016, as the facilities under the jurisdiction of rural communities, undermining the urban landscape and undermining historical tourism as a historical culture tourism city.
(ii) the facts that there is no dispute over the permission for construction (development) because the above location was rejected as an area inappropriate for the location of accommodation facilities according to the results of the deliberation by the Urban Planning Committee (Article 59 of the Act and Article 57 (1) 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Article 2) and Article 57 (1) 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is located in a remote mountain located in the neighboring village, and the instant accommodation facilities are not visible in the surrounding road or village. Therefore, construction of the said accommodation facilities is unlikely to undermine the rural residential environment and urban landscape, and it is difficult to view that the image as a historical and cultural tourism city is damaged.
In addition, the above application has access roads of not less than 3 meters wide, and there is a place where vehicles can cross, and it is possible to fully meet with consent to use the connected land with consent to use.
Therefore, the instant disposition issued on a different premise is abuse of discretion.