공장업종변경승인신청불가처분취소
1. On March 28, 2017, the Defendant’s disposition of non-approval for the change of the category of factory against the Plaintiff is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff, a foundation designated as a development-restricted zone, operated an original processing and leather manufacturing factory (a size 901.42 square meters of manufacturing facilities, size of ancillary facilities 724.47 square meters of manufacturing facilities; hereinafter “existing factory”) in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu (hereinafter “the instant factory site”) which owns the E-friendly Scholarship Association (hereinafter “ E-friendly Scholarship Association”). On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval of the alteration of factory type of business with the content that he/she will build a factory of size 662.29 square meters of manufacturing facilities size and size of ancillary facilities 2,299.1 square meters in the instant factory site.
Article 12 (1) of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones shall not apply to the construction of buildings and the alteration of use, etc. in development restriction zones.
However, Article 18 (Change of Use) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that a person who intends to engage in an act under Article 18 (Change of Use) of the same Act can do so with the permission of the Mayor. Thus, Article 18 (1) 5 (Municipal-Type Factory) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones is amended on September 8, 2015 to change a factory from a development restriction zone to an
B. On March 28, 2017, the Defendant rendered a disposition not to grant approval for the following reasons to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 7, and the purport of whole pleading
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful
가. 피고의 항변 원고가 주식회사 리치앤콥(이하 ‘리치앤콥’이라고 한다)에 이 사건 공장부지와 기존 공장에서의 사업과 관련된 모든 권리를 양도하였으므로, 원고로서는 이 사건 처분의 취소를 구할 원고적격이 없다.
B. According to each description of the evidence Nos. 4 and 5 (including the number of branch offices) Nos. 4 and 5 B, the E-Ba Scholarship Association on July 31, 2016.