logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원(창원) 2016.04.20 2015누11564
건축불허가처분 취소
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 reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. D of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.

2)Paragraph (a)(6)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(6) to 7 pages 13 through 3) is met as follows:

(A) Under Article 58(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, Article 56(1)1(a)1(i) of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act stipulates that “no preservation is necessary because it does not fall under good farmland” as one of the criteria for permission for development activities. In light of the contents and legislative purpose of the relevant provisions, such as Article 37(2)1 of the Farmland Act and Article 6(2)2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones, “ good farmland” in Article 58(3) of the same Act means “farmland where agricultural production infrastructure, such as Gyeong

However, although the land of this case is farmland, the arable land of which has been completed, it is difficult to readily conclude that the land of this case falls under the above item (a) (i) by itself, and no other evidence exists to deem that the land of this case falls under the above excellent farmland.

Even if the land of this case falls under good farmland, there is a need for preservation, and ① there is a large scale of farmland designated as an agricultural promotion area pursuant to the Farmland Act after the Defendant completed adjustment around 1989 in the vicinity of the land of this case, but the land of this case is designated as a production management area other than the agricultural promotion area. This means that the land of this case means the fact that there is a need for preservation and management as good farmland compared to the farmland designated as the agricultural promotion area, and ② the land designated as a production management area.

arrow