건축신고불가처분취소
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 October 21, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a building report including an application for permission for mountainous district conversion (hereinafter “instant report”) with a view to constructing a reinforced concrete building with the size of 1st floor, building area, and total floor area of 73.52 square meters on the ground (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. On November 17, 2015, the Defendant rejected the instant report against the Plaintiff for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Non-permission to convert mountainous district] The land in this case constitutes a management and preservation zone designated to preserve groundwater resources, ecosystems, and landscape pursuant to Article 294 of the Special Act on the Establishment of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province and the Development of Free International City (hereinafter “Special Act on Jeju”). The purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole, is significant risk of serious infringement of public interest, where the surrounding mountainous district might be destroyed due to the destruction of the Jeju-Wal Zone requiring conservation because it was destroyed due to the undeveloped development of the surrounding land, including the land in this case, when comprehensively takes into account the situation of the distribution of Jeju Walalal and Cadastral Division around the land in this case, which is formed with a special geological structure with excellent groundwater development function as a conservation zone for groundwater resources under the Ordinance on the Management of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province (hereinafter “Special Act on Jeju”).
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful by abusing discretion for the following reasons.
1 The land itself in violation of the principle of proportionality is not Jeju Gotjawal zone, but the building to be newly built by the plaintiff is outside the permissible scope prescribed by the relevant ordinances.