2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. On December 11, 2009, the Plaintiff purchased a lot of 21,283 square meters and 6,000 square meters and 20,723 square meters and 21,283 square meters and 21,343 square meters and 20,723 square meters and 21,343 square meters and 20,000 square meters and 21,283 square meters and 21,283 square meters and 20,000 square meters and 21,283 square meters and 21,000 square meters and 21,283 square meters and 2,000, owned by the Korea Institute of Education and Human Resources (hereinafter “the Housing of the Korea Institute of Education and Human Resources”) from the Korea Institute of Education and Human Resources, and completed the construction work of the newly constructed multi-family housing of the Korea Institute of Education and Human Resources (hereinafter “the instant apartment housing”).

B. On October 11, 2012, the Defendant imposed development charges of KRW 372,679,910 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant joint housing construction project is a project subject to imposition of development charges under Article 5(1)1 of the Restitution of Development Gains Act and Article 4(1) [Attachment 1] [Attachment 1] subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the grounds that the instant joint housing construction project is a project subject to imposition of development charges under subparagraph 1 of the same Article (hereinafter “the instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 4, 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, 9, 11 and 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant land was already used as a site for the Korean Institute of Science and Technology prior to the Plaintiff’s purchase, and the Plaintiff removed the said site and constructed the apartment houses. The instant land was unlawful for the Defendant’s disposition imposing development charges on the Plaintiff even though it was not included in the subject of imposition of development charges under the Restitution of Development Gains Act, even though it was not included in the subject of imposition of development charges under the Act on the Restitution of Development Gains in cases where the instant land only constructs a housing on the land which is not subject to construction works, without any physical development acts such as alteration of the form and quality of the land for which the existing site development projects were completed

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

(1) The purpose of the Restitution of Development Gains Act is to contribute to the sound development of the national economy by recovering development gains accruing from land and properly allocating them to prevent speculation on land, promoting the efficient use of land, and contributing to the sound development of the national economy (Article 1 of the Act); and “development gains” refers to increases in land values that exceed increases in normal increases in land prices due to the implementation of development projects, change of land use plan, or other social and economic factors (Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Act).

Article 5 (1) 1 of the Act and Article 4 (1) [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provide that housing site development projects or housing construction projects under the Housing Act shall be one of the housing site development projects subject to imposition of development charges under subparagraph 1 of the same Article: Provided, That housing construction projects implemented on the land, the creation of which is completed by the implementation of a development project subject to imposition of development charges, such as housing site development projects under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, or on the land, which is created by the implementation of a

(2) Comprehensively taking account of the following facts: (a) No. 6, No. 15, and No. 16 of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act, the Korea Institute of Science and Technology, which had been constructed on the instant land, was approved for use on September 6, 1980 and February 26, 1986; (b) the instant land was combined with 27 lots, such as 86 square meters, which were the site of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology ( Address 1 omitted) and was partially divided, and the land category of the instant land was changed to “building site” on November 25, 200, its construction site was not subject to construction charges; (c) the Act on the Restitution of Development Gains, which was enacted on December 30, 198 and was not subject to construction charges on the instant land; (d) the construction site was not subject to construction charges imposed on the instant land, and (d) the construction charges were not subject to construction charges imposed on the instant land before the enforcement of the Act.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case based on the premise that the plaintiff conducted a project subject to the imposition of development charges under Article 5 (1) 1 of the Act and Article 4 (1) [Attached Table 1] 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment Omission of Related Acts]

Judges Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Judge)