logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.10.19 2015구단60047
변상금부과처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing indemnity of KRW 14,513,980 against the Plaintiff on August 17, 2015 is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff, around August 1, 1984, constructed a neighborhood living facility and a house (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land owned by the Plaintiff, Mapo-gu Seoul (hereinafter “B”) C, 113.5 square meters (hereinafter “C”) and D, 150 square meters (hereinafter “D”) and on the land owned by the State (hereinafter “instant land”), and thereafter possess the instant land until now.

On August 17, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing KRW 14,513,980 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land, which was a State-owned land, from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014 without permission (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Based on recognition, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 2, 3, 9, and 11 (including additional numbers) and the purport of the entire pleading as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate, the Plaintiff newly constructed the building by obtaining a building permit to construct the building of this case on the land C and D’s ground around April 2, 1984, and owned the building without knowing that the land of this case was used as the site of the building.

Therefore, since the Plaintiff acquired the instant land by prescription by occupying the instant land in a peaceful and public manner with the intent to own it for at least 20 years, the instant disposition is unlawful.

Facts of recognition

The following facts are recognized in full view of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 15 (including branch numbers) and the whole purport of arguments.

F. On November 28, 1962, a registration of ownership was made as owned by the State on the land cadastre on November 28, 1962. On March 28, 1972, the instant land was divided from the above land and its land cadastre was drafted on July 25, 1986, and the registration of ownership was completed in the name of the State on the same day.

On February 10, 1975, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to D land, G land, H land, and I land before the annexation on December 20, 1983.

The plaintiff on February 15, 1983 C.

arrow