logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2014.12.04 2014누10880
토석채취허가신청반려처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasons why this court should explain are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except to dismiss or add each corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(7) On July 20, 2012, immediately after the Plaintiff filed the instant application, the Ministry of Environment announced the amendment of the instant application to Grade 1, 2, and 3 zones on the ecological and natural map under the Natural Environment Conservation Act. The Plaintiff’s objection was defective, the National Institute of Environmental Research corrected and supplemented the ecological and natural map on December 10, 2013 under Article 2013-510 of the National Institute of Environmental and Research, and published the amendment to Grade 1 to Grade 1, 2, and 3 zones on the ground that the instant application was filed on July 20, 2012, the Ministry of Environment announced the amendment to Grade 2, 1, 2, and 3 zones on the ground that the instant application was filed on the ground of Grade 2, 2, and 3 as the result of the reexamination to the National Institute of Environmental and Natural Research on the ground of Grade 1, 2, and 4 as the result of the reexamination to the National Institute of Environmental and Natural Research on the ground of Grade 2, respectively.

arrow