개발부담금환급거부처분취소
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is an association established for the purpose of performing an urban environment improvement project (hereinafter “instant development project”) by designating Mapo-gu Seoul and 185 parcels (hereinafter “instant parcels”) as its business area.
On December 10, 2009, the Plaintiff implemented the instant development project after obtaining authorization for project implementation from the Defendant, and completed the instant development project after obtaining authorization for completion on August 28, 2015.
B. On January 13, 2016, the Defendant imposed development charges of the instant development project at KRW 3,389,420,850 on the Plaintiff at the time when the date of imposition of the project implementation authorization pursuant to the Restitution of Development Gains Act (hereinafter “Development Gains Refund Act”). The Defendant imposed development charges of the instant development project at the time when the date of imposition of the said authorization was completed.
(hereinafter “instant imposition disposition”). On the other hand, the details of calculating the development charges of the instant imposition disposition are as follows.
(2) The calculated amount of non-fixed land (1) The land price as of the starting point of the completion of the construction project is 34,40,361,8763,272,814 indirect labor cost and 741,770,772,814 indirect labor cost and 18,196,18,196, and the general administrative cost of 989,303,614,614,00 design cost and 52,208,568 charges and 3,52,714,752 land improvement cost and 909,310,000 compensation cost and 2,865,00 compensation cost, 865,008, 7025, 22525, 214, 184, 197, 395, 394, 197, 197, 305, 1964, 19637, 197
C. On July 12, 2016, the Plaintiff paid development charges of KRW 3,389,420,850 according to the instant imposition disposition.
The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant calculated development charges without considering the portion of corporate tax attributed to the business year 2015 that can be appropriated as development costs pursuant to Article 12(1) of the Development Gains Refund Act and that the Plaintiff erroneously paid KRW 35,270,026, out of the development charges that the Plaintiff had already paid, and that the Defendant was subject to the instant disposition of imposition on the Defendant around December 12, 2016.