logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.06.15 2016구합12851
가설건축물 존치기간 연장 불허가 처분 취소의 소
Text

1. Disposition of non-permission to extend the retention period of a temporary building as of November 1, 2016 against the Plaintiff on the part of the Defendant, and December 7, 2016.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company running the business of newly constructing and selling the apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment business”) in the Jeonsung-gun A, Jeonsung-gun, an apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment business”).

B. On April 18, 2016, in the course of promoting the instant apartment project, the Plaintiff reported to the Defendant on April 18, 2016 that the model house of the instant apartment building (hereinafter “instant temporary building”) was built by October 31, 2016 within the retention period, on the land outside Bosung-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and one parcel, and the Defendant accepted the said report around April 20, 2016.

C. On September 21, 2016, the Defendant issued a notice to the Plaintiff on the expiration of the retention period of the instant temporary building, and notified the Plaintiff to the effect that if intending to extend the retention period of the instant temporary building, the report on the extension of retention period should be filed (hereinafter “instant notice”).

On October 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a report on the extension of the retention period of the instant temporary building (hereinafter “instant extension report”) with the Defendant on October 27, 2016, whose retention period is until April 30, 2017.

E. However, on November 1, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of denying the extension of the retention period of the instant temporary building on the ground of “the expiration of the authorization period, such as the location and size of a passenger terminal (in the absence of a written consent to land use),” and “traffic accidents and inconvenient damages for terminal users” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

F. After that, on December 7, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the corrective order under the Building Act (hereinafter “instant corrective order”) regarding the instant temporary building on the grounds that “the termination of the change of location, size, etc. of a bus terminal under the Passenger Transport Service Act” and “the termination of the retention period of a temporary building under the Building Act”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul Nos. 1, 2, 5.

arrow