logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.10.30 2018구합22441
개발행위허가 신청건에 대한 불허가통보처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Plaintiff A is the trade name of “K”, Plaintiff B is the trade name of “L”, Plaintiff C is the trade name of “M”, Plaintiff D is the trade name of “N”, Plaintiff E is the trade name of “O”, Plaintiff F is the trade name of “P”, Plaintiff G is the trade name of “P”, Plaintiff H is the trade name of “R”, Plaintiff H is the trade name of “S”, Plaintiff H is the trade name of “S”, Plaintiff J is the trade name of “T”, Plaintiff J is the trade name of “T”, and Plaintiff J obtained permission for the electric power generation business concerning solar power generation projects from the Defendant on January 31, 2017.

B. The terms and conditions of permission for each of the above electric generation businesses include a comprehensive civil petition and opinions to the effect that “the conditions of permission for development activities (construction of structures and alteration of form and quality) under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) are subject to permission and the detailed criteria for permission for development activities are in conformity with the guidelines for the operation of permission for development activities under Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.”

다. 원고들은 소외 U과 함께 2018. 1. 19. 피고에게 경북 영주시 V리(이하 ‘V리’라고만 한다) W 임야 17,615㎡, X 도로 1,354㎡, Y 도로 654㎡(이하 ‘이 사건 신청지’라 한다) 지상에 부지면적 17,802㎡, 공작물 설치면적 5,626㎡, 모듈갯수 2,900개인 태양광 발전시설(이하 ‘이 사건 발전시설’이라 한다)을 설치하기 위한 개발행위(공작물설치, 토지형질변경)허가신청(이하 ‘이 사건 신청’이라 한다)을 하였다. 라.

On April 4, 2018, after deliberation by the Urban Planning Committee on March 21, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition of denying the instant application against the Plaintiffs and U (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the reasons therefor are as follows.

(1) Results of deliberation by the Urban Planning Commission: 2) Grounds for non-permission

1. Article 58 of the National Land Planning Act and the Enforcement Decree thereof for permission for development activities;

arrow