logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2014.05.23 2013누1691
보상금증액
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim extended in the trial is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the decision are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from No. 8 to No. 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, this part of the decision is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant case ①, ③ in a zone connected to a motorway pursuant to the former Act on the Motorways, which null and void the alteration of a specific use area of land, a clearance zone may be designated within the scope not exceeding 50 meters from the road boundary. However, according to the former Act, the above clearance zone cannot be designated within the urban planning zone pursuant to the former Urban Planning Act, however, the Defendant is a construction project of the I Expressway (hereinafter “I Expressway project”).

(1) At the time, the purpose of this case, where a special-purpose area was located in an industrial exclusive area, was to change the special-purpose area into a green area for the purpose of the I Highway project on the part within 50 meters of both sides, including the land, adjacent to the I Highway project. This is unlawful as it functions as a de facto clearance zone contrary to the prohibition of designation of the clearance zone, and such change constitutes deviation and abuse of discretionary authority, which is made by the convenience law to lower any violation of law or any kind of compensation, and the alteration of the special-purpose area itself is null and void as it is serious and clear under the substantive law. 2) The purpose of this case, ① the alteration of the land use area, ③ the alteration of the land use area, ③ the alteration of the land use area, and ③ the land was changed

On the other hand, the defendant has been gradually expanding the highway after I Highway project, and the project in this case has expanded the expressway on the extension line of I Expressway project and this is the I Expressway project.

arrow