logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.08.22 2013누29300
도로점용허가취소처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the statement in this case is as follows, and the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or modification as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2)

From the fourth side of the judgment of the first instance, each "this court" shall be changed to each "first instance court".

Under the same five pages, the following parts shall be added:

Sanction against violation of administrative regulations is a sanction against the objective fact of violation of administrative regulations in order to achieve the administrative purpose, and thus, it may be imposed even if there is no intention or negligence on the part of the violator, barring any special circumstance, such as where there is a justifiable reason not to cause any negligence on the part of the violator.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Du5972, May 26, 2000; 2009Du4272, Jun. 11, 2009). 5 pages 3, “In light of the above legal principles,” the instant case is added to “Health Team,” in front of “the above-mentioned recognition fact”.

The same five pages "1.17." shall be changed to "1.1. 3. ........"

6 pages 5 of the same 6 pages "(see Evidence A 5-3 and Evidence A 1)" shall be added following the following:

In the same 7th page, “no reason exists” is added to “no reason” (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Du4669, May 25, 2006).

2. If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

arrow