본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.12.24 2015구합63838
행정대집행비용 납부처분 취소청구

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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


. Housing No. 439 (hereinafter “instant order”) and the instant order

E. On January 6, 2015, the Plaintiff installed a boiler on the floor of the instant vinyl that was born in both sides, and January 8, 2015.

1.9. The Consolidated and boiler was introduced into Korea.

F. As the Plaintiff did not suspend the instant construction, the Defendant issued a warrant of vicarious administrative execution (hereinafter “instant warrant”) with the following content on January 9, 2015, to the Plaintiff.

The name of the warrant of vicarious administrative execution (name of organization) A (Crown wood company) and the address of D (Crown wood company): After the Gangnam-gu Residential Self-Governing Council of Gangnam-gu, the letter of order was served on January 6, 2015 to remove, reinstate, or correct the illegal artificial structures (building, obstacle, etc.) owned by oneself by January 9, 2015, by January 6, 2015, but the notice was given to the Gangnam-gu Office in accordance with Article 3 (2) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act that it is inevitable to execute the following vicarious execution due to the failure of the designated deadline:

* If there is an objection against the above disposition, I may file an administrative appeal within 90 days from the date on which they become aware of the disposition in accordance with Article 27 of the Administrative Appeals Act.

-Name 05:00 on January 12, 2015, name of the position (class) belonging to the person in charge of the temporary vicarious administrative execution (class) in charge of the cost of vicarious administrative execution, the head of Gangnam-gu Housing and Eth (Administration Grade 5) F 9,649,000 (Administration Grade 6);

G. Even after issuing the instant warrant of vicarious execution, the Defendant, at the time prior to January 12, 2015, performed the instant vinyl by vicarious execution, where the Plaintiff returned to the original state, with respect to the instant vinyl, the part that the Plaintiff performed the instant construction on the date of prior notice.

(F) On February 23, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to pay expenses for vicarious administrative execution (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff to pay KRW 9,174,00,00 as indicated below, as the cost of the instant vicarious administrative execution (hereinafter “instant disposition”).