logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2012.06.26 2011구합3323
토석채취변경허가신청불허가처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 1, 2007, the Plaintiff Quasi-Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Quasi-Construction”) obtained permission from the Defendant for gathering earth and sand from April 30, 2007 to April 30, 2010 with respect to five parcels of land, 93,392 square meters (hereinafter “the instant gathering site”) among the five parcels of land, such as the gambin Domsan 139-8, 145, mountain 147, mountain 162, mountain 163-2, and mountain 163-2, etc.

B. On September 23, 2011, Plaintiff Quasi-Construction requested the Defendant to change the permission to collect earth and sand to the existing permission to collect earth and sand, along with the Plaintiff-based limited liability company (hereinafter “alternative Development”), while collecting earth and sand in the instant land.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant application”). C.

Accordingly, on October 25, 2011, the Defendant rendered a disposition to deny the Plaintiffs’ instant application for reasons as follows (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(1) The above-mentioned forest land is not more than 2,00 meters in the area of expressway and railroad surgine, which is the area subject to the restriction on the collection of earth and rocks pursuant to Article 25-3 and Article 32-3(2)1 and 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, and is an area not more than 1,000 meters in the temporary road surging area (hereinafter “the ground for disposition 1”). (2) When applying for permission for earth and rocks (soil), the “annual survey of the area for the collection of earth and rocks” under Article 24(1)6 of the Enforcement Rule of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act was omitted, and in relation to subparagraph 10 of the same paragraph, some sections were designed to be 16.9% of the area without packaging in violation of the provisions for the design of access roads pursuant to attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Creation and Management of Forest Resources Act (hereinafter “the ground for disposition 2”).

arrow