logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.07.14 2016누74615
개발행위허가취소처분취소
Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is that the land category No. 2 and 3 of the first instance judgment is corrected from “former” to “forest”. Paragraph (2) is the same as the statement of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for adding the judgment to this court, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff of this court's additional decision in this court asserts that "the plaintiff is not only the person who started the business or the construction work as prescribed by Article 31 (2) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and even if not, the defendant promised to allow the plaintiff to suspend the plaintiff's development activities without authority but also revoke the disposition in this case on the ground of the change of specific use area in around 2008 about the land of this case for the following reasons: "The plaintiff is also the person who started the business or the construction work as prescribed by Article 31 (2) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and even if not, the defendant agreed to allow the plaintiff's withdrawal of the road development plan or the long-term postponement of the road development plan of the Korea Highway for several occasions, and then the plaintiff would be able to withdraw the plan.

The above assertion made by the plaintiff in this court is not different from the contents of the plaintiff's claim in the first instance court. The evidence submitted in the first instance court and the evidence submitted in this court (the result of the fact-finding on the president of the Korea Highway Corporation in this court) are examined in both the first instance court and the first instance court (the first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's first instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's second instance court's

arrow