logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.07.08 2014구합6518
이행강제금부과처분취소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a concrete roof of reinforced concrete structure B in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si (hereinafter “instant housing”).

B. On December 6, 2007, the head of Sungnam-si District District Court imposed KRW 14,250,000 for enforcement fine on the ground that the Plaintiff had extended 107.52 square meters of the instant housing among the instant housing without permission. The Plaintiff paid it on July 10, 2008.

C. However, even after the payment of enforcement fines, if the violation was not corrected, the head of Sung-nam City branch office issued the first corrective order as of September 25, 2008, and the second corrective order as of October 27, 2008. On November 28, 2008, the enforcement fines of KRW 14,353,000 on January 5, 2009 (hereinafter “instant enforcement fines”) were imposed on the Plaintiff.

The Defendant did not pay the instant enforcement fine by June 2, 2014, which was the final payment date. On July 5, 2013, the Defendant sent a public auction guide and demand notice (hereinafter “the first demand notice”) to the Plaintiff for the first time to urge the Plaintiff to pay the enforcement fine of the instant case by mail. On December 4, 2013, the Defendant sent the same public auction guide and demand notice (hereinafter “instant demand notice”) to the Plaintiff by mail.

E. The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission on the instant urge, but on July 22, 2014, the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission’s demand of this case cannot be subject to an appeal litigation as an independent administrative disposition.

‘The decision of dismissal was made on the ground of ‘the reasons'.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 3, 6 evidence, Eul 2 through 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to Article 80(6) of the Building Act, Articles 8 and 19 of the Act on the Collection, etc. of Local Non-Tax Revenue, and Article 23 of the National Tax Collection Act, a person subject to a disposition imposing a non-performance penalty within the time limit for the enforcement fine.

arrow