logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 (제주) 2018.09.05 2017누1775
도시계획시설사업시행자지정및실시계획인가처분취소등
Text

1. All appeals filed by the Defendant and the Intervenor are dismissed.

2. The portion resulting from the participation in the appeal costs.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and thus, it is consistent with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the modification as set forth in

2. The amended part of the judgment of the first instance court is both the “Defendant Seopopo-market” in the column for the reasons for the judgment as the “Seopo-market.”

The first instance court judgment on the invalidity or invalidity of a disposition shall be conducted in accordance with the following subparagraphs, from 23 pages 15 to 24 pages 12.

As seen in the background of the above disposition, the housing complex development project was implemented in Seogpo-si J (area 403,00 square meters) where the decision of urban planning facilities was rendered for the creation of amusement park, and the Defendant’s Intervenor was designated as a project implementer pursuant to the Special Jeju Special Act on the Abolition of the Gu. According to the evidence No. 3, Defendant, Seopo-si, and the persons related to the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s participation in the development project were to undertake the said development project according to the method of amusement park creation, and for the said development project, there is a risk of being rejected by the Urban Planning Council on the ground that the alteration of urban planning plans under the former National Land Planning Act would be possible in the event of the implementation of the development project under the former Special Act on the Abolition of the former. According to the entries in the above No. 1, 10, 11, 26, 34 square meters, the Defendant submitted an application for the alteration of the project area to 74, 700 square meters, and 7.5.

arrow