(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.11.22 2017누44949

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.11.22 2017누44949

재활용부과금부과처분취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of the first instance is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of the first instance (as stated in the second to fifth attached Table), with the exception of dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of the second instance. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article

(hereinafter the meaning of the abbreviationd language used in this context is the same as the judgment of the first instance). The second 11th "12.16" of the second 11 shall be read as "12.18."

Part 1) 3 to 4 of the second week “At present, the above case is pending.” The above judgment was rendered on May 26, 2017 by the appeal of the plaintiff and the Minister of Environment with the Supreme Court Decision 2017Du34636, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time. The third part “H” of the third part “S.” Following the third part “the plaintiff was notified” of the third part, “the details of the resolution of the board of directors as well as the suspension of qualification of 16 members (for one year as of September 12, 2014, the suspension of qualification) to the Minister of Environment and the defendant on September 16, 2014, and “the 15th part” were added to “the 4th part “including the 2nd part “” of the 4nd part “I” and “the 2nd part “I” of the 15th part “I, 2014.31, 2014.3.4.4.14.4.4”

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The court's explanation concerning this part of the plaintiff's assertion is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from No. 8 to No. 6 and No. 7 under the fifth table), and therefore, the court's explanation is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the relevant statutes are the reasons why the court rendered the judgment of the first instance.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-행정소송법 제8조 제2항

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.02.22 2016누44225

-서울고등법원 2017. 02. 22. 선고 2016누44225 판결

-대전지방법원 2015.02.05 2014나103082

-서울고등법원 2017.06.21 2016누71913

-대구고등법원 2016.01.15 2015누6232