The meaning of changing the form and quality of land under Article 21(2) of the Urban Planning Act and the relevant requirements

The change in the form and quality of land means the act of changing the form and quality of land by cutting, filling-up, or suspending land, and the reclamation of public waters, and it requires that the form and quality of land be de facto changed into external form and that the change is difficult to recover.

Article 21(2) of the Urban Planning Act

[Plaintiff, Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Lee Do-young and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

A

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 92No4912 delivered on January 15, 1993

The judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Criminal Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below acknowledged that the defendant raised the soil of the dry field of this case in a flat and constructed vinyl houses above it, and determined that the defendant's act constitutes a change in the form and quality of land prohibited by Article 21 (2) of the Urban Planning Act.

However, the alteration of the form and quality of land means the alteration of the form and quality of land by cutting, filling-up, or cutting, filling-up, etc. and reclamation of public waters, and it is required to de facto change the form and quality of land into an outer form (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do1477, Nov. 27, 1992) and to make it difficult to recover due to the alteration (see Supreme Court Decision 91Do2234, Nov. 26, 191). Thus, we examine whether the Defendant’s act satisfies the above requirements.

First of all, the evidence adopted by the court below alone does not recognize the defendant from the fact that he raised the soil of dry field in a balanced manner, and according to the image of field photographs bound on the 7 pages of investigation records, the floor of the vinyl house constructed by the defendant in the dry field of this case is flat and the part of the floor seems to be higher than other parts of the dry field is recognized. However, the flating of the above floor is nothing more than the cutting of the dry field, but it is hard to say that the height is different from the wind that flapizes the soil of the dry field for drainage, and it does not seem to have a difference in the height of the wind that flapizes the soil of the dry field of this case for drainage, in light of the legal principles of changing the form and quality of the land in light of the above facts alone.

In addition, an act of installing plastic houses in dry field or an act of piling plastic snicking in snives inside them can not be seen as a form of changing the form and quality of land.

In addition, the court below recognized the defendant's failure to comply with the order of restoration of the above dry field from the Seocho-gu Office without any justifiable reason, and judged that the defendant's failure to comply with the corrective measures of the relevant administrative agency regarding the change of land form and quality. As seen earlier, unless the change of the defendant's land form and quality is recognized, the corrective measures

Therefore, although all of the facts charged in this case are without proof of crime or without a crime, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the alteration of land form and quality or due to a failure to exhaust all deliberations, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, there is a reason to point this out.

Therefore, the judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)