logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.12.05 2012누34435
건축허가신청불허가처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the Defendant.

Reasons

1. The reasons for this court’s explanation by the court of first instance are from “the developments leading to the disposition of the first instance” to “the lawfulness of the disposition of the instant case,” and

(a)a summary of the Party’s assertion;

(b) relevant laws and regulations;

C. Until November 200, “A building permit was obtained for the construction of 1,157.91 square meters in total and 8 houses with 2nd floor size from November 29, 200 to December 14, 200” in the first instance court’s first instance court’s 1,157.91 square meters in total from the date of the application of this case, where the forest was in the state of forest as of November 1, 200, and 16 attached from the date of application to December 14, 200, for the total floor area of 1,157.91 square meters in total, 8 houses with 2nd floor size and 8 houses with 2nd floor size of the second instance court’s 1,157.91 square meters in the first instance court’s 4th court’s 200 to December 1, 2004, and “the period of permission for conversion of mountainous district” from the date of application to the date of application.

Except as mentioned below 2. The decision shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

D. Determination 1) As long as an application for a building permit does not comply with any restriction prescribed by the relevant laws and regulations, such as the Building Act, a building permit holder should, as a matter of course, grant a building permit under the same Act, and notwithstanding the absence of a serious public interest, permission to a person meeting the requirements cannot be denied on the grounds other than the grounds for restriction prescribed by the relevant laws and regulations (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Du1227, Nov. 9, 2006). Meanwhile, the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 10599, Apr. 14, 201; hereinafter “former National Land Planning Act”).

(b).

arrow