1. The Defendant’s imposition of development charges of KRW 242,021,60 against the Plaintiff on November 19, 2015 shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 24, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the instant land development project (hereinafter “instant project”) by obtaining a building permit for the construction of Class II neighborhood living facilities (manufacturing facility) on a total of 1,983 square meters of land outside Gwangju-si and three parcels (hereinafter “instant land”). After obtaining the said building permit, the Plaintiff completed the instant land development project upon obtaining the said approval on April 24, 2015 (hereinafter “instant project”).

B. On November 19, 2015, the Defendant imposed development charges of the instant project KRW 242,021,60 on the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Defendant asserts that the instant disposition is lawful in light of the grounds for the disposition and the relevant statutes.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case against which the Defendant imposed development charges is unlawful, even though the land of this case and the administrative district of this case are different, while the land of Gwangju City D (hereinafter “D”) is identical to the land of this case and the administrative district of this case and the land of this case and the state of use, including road conditions, are similar to those of the land of this case, although the land of this case and the administrative district of Gwangju City are similar to those of the land of this case.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. 1) In calculating development charges, the reference land should be selected as reference land in the vicinity where the use status of the land concerned is the most similar to that of the reference land, i.e., specific use area, land category, land use (actual use), surrounding environment, location, and other natural and social conditions (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du2437, May 30, 2003). 2) As to this case, health stand, A, and 9.