건축이행강제금부과처분무효확인
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. This part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the pertinent part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following matters to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasoning of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2)
2.For the 10th page "0.03", the following shall be added to the "True less than 10 won":
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The gist of the party's assertion 1) The standard market price, which serves as the basis for calculating enforcement fines against large-scale repair of this case, should be calculated by multiplying the standard market price of new buildings by 20%, which is the relevant index, pursuant to Article 80 (1) 2 of the Building Act, Article 4 (2) of the Local Tax Act, and Article 4 (2) of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Real Estate Standard Market Price Table, but the defendant imposed enforcement fines on the basis of the standard market price calculated without multiplying the relevant index. Therefore, the disposition of this case contains an error of law as above, and its defect is significant and obvious. As such, the part exceeding KRW 1,727,084, which is equivalent to 20% of the enforcement fines of this case among KRW 8,635,420, is invalid. 2) The standard market price, which serves as the basis for calculating enforcement fines against large-scale repair of this case, shall be deemed the individual housing price publicly announced under the Act on Public Notice and Appraisal of Real Estate Prices.
Even if Article 4(2) of the Local Tax Act and Article 4(2) of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Standard Market Price Table apply, there is an error of law that does not apply the relevant index.
Even if the defect is significant and obvious, it cannot be said that the disposition in this case is invalid.
(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;
C. 1) Determination of whether the instant disposition is unlawful is based on Article 80(1)2 of the Building Act, the building-to-land ratio is the building-to-land ratio.