logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2019.05.30 2018누6491
건축허가신청불허가처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is stated as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Under 3, the National Land Planning and Utilization Act to be amended by Act No. 15727, Aug. 14, 2018; hereinafter “former National Land Planning and Utilization Act”).

3 The following shall be added to six lines below:

1) Article 8(1) of the Act on the Management and Use of Livestock Excreta (hereinafter “the Livestock Excreta Act”) provides that “the head of a Gun, etc. may designate and publicly announce a certain area and restrict livestock raising as prescribed by municipal ordinance of the head of the relevant local government with respect to an area falling under “area requiring the protection of a living environment in a residential densely-populated area,” etc. to conserve the living environment of local residents.” Article 8 of the Livestock Excreta Act provides that “The former Ordinance on Areas subject to Restriction on Livestock Raising (amended by Ordinance No. 2256, Mar. 21, 2017; hereinafter “the instant Ordinance”) enacted by delegation of Article 8 of the Livestock Excreta Act (amended by Ordinance No. 2256, Mar. 21, 2017; hereinafter “the instant Ordinance”) shall be construed as “where the lineal distance from the site of the livestock shed to the nearest household within 500 meters from the site of the livestock shed to a residential area, thereby restricting livestock raising of chickens.”

However, with the amendment of the instant Ordinance by Ordinance No. 2256, Mar. 21, 2017, 2017, the provision on the distance restriction between the residential area and the chickens was amended from “within 500 meters” to “within 1000 meters”. Article 1 of the Addenda to the said amendment is “this Ordinance enters into force on the date of its promulgation,” and Article 2 “permission for development activities, permission for diversion of farmland (report) before this Ordinance enters into force,” and “Article 2.

arrow