The case holding that the disposition imposing road occupation and use fees on escalators installed in the stairs connecting the underground railway station and the nearby department stores with the first underground floor is unlawful.

In the past, the installation of a passage through which the entrance stairs used by the general public connects to the calendar and the 1st underground floor of the department store owned by the plaintiff in the vicinity, and the use of the passage route by the persons entering the above department store, and the plaintiff installed an escalator in the above part of the entrance stairs in order to promote the convenience of passage of the above part of the entrance stairs, and it is not used for the general use of the above part of the underground stairs, and it is not used for the plaintiff's special use. Thus, even if the conditions of donation at the time of the installation permit are not fulfilled, it is not deemed that the plaintiff occupied and used the installed part in light of the purpose of the installation, purpose of use, the state of use, etc.

Article 80-2 of the Road Act

Hotel Dol Co., Ltd. and one other

The head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing unjust enrichment of KRW 1,747,410 as to the Plaintiff’s hotel lot on June 22, 1990, and KRW 1,004,420 as to the Plaintiff’s hotel lot company and KRW 1,004,420 as to the Plaintiff’s lot shopping company is revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. From January 1, 1990 to June 30 of the same year, the plaintiffs installed Escalator of 18.3 square meters (breadth 1.55 meters, length 1.8 meters) on the stairs of entry into the escator of the escator of the escator of 18.3 square meters (breadth 1.55 meters, length 1.8 meters), which are the roads of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Jung-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City from January 1, 1990 to June 30 of the same year, and occupied and used the part specially, and on the ground that it will be occupation and use in the future, the defendant is unjust enrichment equivalent to the road occupation and use fees for the above occupation and use period under Article 80-2 of the Road Act, which is the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the road occupation and use fees for the above occupation and use period, and there is no dispute between the parties concerned.

2. The plaintiffs asserted that the disposition of this case by the defendant is unlawful since the plaintiffs did not occupy and use the part of the installation of the blade, as they planned to accept donation in the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, for the sake of the convenience of citizens in the existing stairs leading to the passage of the subway station.

Therefore, according to the above-mentioned facts, Gap 6 through 10, Eul 3's 1,2, Eul 4 and 6's testimony, and the result of on-site inspection of this court, the plaintiffs were found to have been using the above-mentioned part of the 10-day connection building without obtaining permission from the defendant on October 21, 1987, and the above-mentioned part of the 1-day connection building was owned by the defendant on February 23, 198, which was owned by the subway Corporation and the plaintiff 1-story shopping company's underground connections to the above 9-day connection of the 9-day connection of the 1-day connection building without obtaining permission from the above 9-day connection of the above 9-day connection of the above 9-day connection of the above 9-day connection of the 1-day connection of the 9-day connection of the above 5-day connection of the 1-day connection of the above 9-day connection of the above 9-day connection of the building.

3. If so, the plaintiffs' claim of this case seeking its revocation is legitimate since the disposition of this case was unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.

Judges Kim Young-il (Presiding Judge)