The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff’s housing site development zone project, which was completed in 204, Jinwon-dong, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “former housing zone project”).

B With respect to the land for high school which was not sold among the land for the project, the "Projects for the construction of the 2-Dong Public Housing (Happiness Housing)" which was approved on December 24, 2015 and approved on December 24, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case").

and the defendant is the public sewerage management authority having jurisdiction over the project of this case.

On June 2004, the Plaintiff paid KRW 220,00,000 to the so-called “other act” which means development activities involving the construction and extension of public sewerage at the time of completion of the previous district project, which is a housing site development project.

The Plaintiff implemented the instant project within the previous district project site, constructed three apartment units (460 households, 13 floors), and ancillary and welfare facilities, and completed the inspection on December 23, 2018. On April 22, 2019, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff the charge on the Plaintiff for the instant project, on the ground that the instant project constituted “other acts” as stipulated under Article 61(2) of the Sewerage Act and Article 35(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, on the ground that the instant project constituted “other acts” as stipulated under Article 61(2) of the Sewerage Act and Article 35(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

Accordingly, on May 8, 2019, the Plaintiff’s instant project to the Defendant side before being amended by the Special Act on the Housing Construction, Etc. (amended by Act No. 13498, Aug. 28, 2015; hereinafter the same).

As a housing project, it is not an urban development project that belongs to the "other act" stipulated in the above Sewerage Act, but an opinion was presented to the effect that the amount of charges should be deducted, considering the volume of the site plan for high school calculated in the past, since the use of infrastructure constructed in the previous district project is not accompanied by the extension or new construction of public sewerage, it cannot be subject to the imposition of sewerage charges, and thus, it cannot be subject to the imposition of sewerage charges.

The defendant.