logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 10. 31. 선고 2017두54289 판결
(심리불속행)지방자치단체장의 공사 중단지시 등 보완가능한 처분은 비사업용토지로 볼 수 없는 부득이한 사유가 아님(국승)[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court 2016Nu69507 (2017.07)

Title

(Trialless Conduct) Supplementary disposition such as the order of the head of a local government to suspend construction, etc., is not a non-business land, but a non-business land (state succession).

Summary

The order of the head of the local government to suspend the construction is possible to supplement the order by obtaining permission to occupy and use the controversial land, and the notification of the farmland disposal obligation cannot be viewed as the restriction of the building permission under the Building Act, etc., so it is difficult to view that there is an inevitable reason not to regard the land as the land for non-business.

Related statutes

Article 97 (Calculation of Necessary Expenses for Transfer Income)

Cases

2016Du42135 Disposition of revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

Plaintiff-Appellant

OO

Defendant-Appellee

○ Head of tax office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2015Nu69746 Decided 19, 2016

Imposition of Judgment

September 9, 2016

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Examining the judgment below and the grounds of appeal, since it is apparent that the appellant’s ground of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow