logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.11.07 2017구단10497
도로변상금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

On October 8, 2014, the Plaintiff leased from the Republic of Korea a building of 434 square meters and above ground (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) in Gangnam-gu, Seoul (hereinafter referred to as “Bdong”) (hereinafter referred to as “instant building,” and, in the event that land and buildings are collectively referred to, “the instant real estate”) and operates D Professional Schools in the instant building.

From January 1, 2015 to September 6, 2016, the Defendant imposed KRW 5,000,340,000 on the Plaintiff on January 11, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied 21 square meters of E-Road 41,211.9 square meters (hereinafter “instant road”) among E-Road 41,21.9 square meters for the instant school without permission.

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to the road of this case is legitimate, since the road of this case is offered and used for the general public’s traffic, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have used the road of this case in a tangible and regular manner. (2) Since the Republic of Korea was deemed to have obtained permission to occupy and use the road of this case in accordance with Article 11(5) of the Building Act at the time of constructing the building of this case, the Plaintiff merely as a lessee did not have any intentional negligence in the occupation and use of the road of this case.

3) Permission to occupy and use a road shall be imposed on the Republic of Korea, the owner of the instant building, for capital expenditure. 4) In light of the fact that the Plaintiff leased the instant building on or around October 2009 and did not impose any indemnity for five years from the Defendant, and that the area of the instant road is considerably smaller than that of the entire area, the instant disposition cannot be permitted against the good faith principle.

Judgment

1) Article 61(1) of the Road Act provides that a person who intends to build, rebuild, alter, or remove a structure, object, or other facility, or occupy and use a road for any other reason.

arrow