Whether the permission may be revoked on the ground that the construction permission has been granted to a person who has no ownership of the site.

Since a building permit is an administrative disposition issued when granting a building permit on a building site pursuant to the Building Act and subordinate statutes is deemed not to hinder the construction administration, even if it is issued to a person who has no ownership or right to use the building site, the building permit cannot be deemed to be illegal unless it conflicts with the Building Act and subordinate statutes.

Article 5 of the Building Act

Plaintiff

Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor

(1) The disposition that the Defendant revoked the construction permission of March 22, 1965 on the construction of a store and office on the land Nos. 56-3 and 4, Jung-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which the Plaintiff had against the Plaintiff, as of April 17, 1964 shall be revoked.

(2) Costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

(1) The defendant issued a building permit to the plaintiff on March 22, 1965 with the permission number No. 358 on the construction of a store and office on the land No. 56-3 and 4, Jung-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which had been cancelled on April 17, 1965, and there is no dispute between the parties. When the plaintiff claims that the above building permit was cancelled, the plaintiff prepared an application document as if the above site was owned by himself and submitted it to the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant believed that the above site was owned by the plaintiff and the above site was believed to have been owned by the plaintiff, but it was found that the above site was not owned by the plaintiff.

(2) However, a building permit is an administrative disposition issued when granting a building permit on the site in accordance with the Building Act and subordinate statutes is deemed not to hinder the construction administration, and thus, the administrative agency does not need to investigate who is the ownership of the site in granting the building permit. Even if the building permit is issued against a person who has no ownership or right to use the site, as long as it does not conflict with the Building Act, it is valid as long as it does not conflict with the Building Act, and thus, the person who obtained the building permit does not acquire the right of trust on the site, and thus, it cannot

Therefore, even if the Plaintiff and the Nonparty believe that the ownership of the site was owned by the Plaintiff as alleged by the Defendant, and subsequently the construction permit was granted to the Plaintiff, and thereafter, the Plaintiff was found to have no ownership (in relation to the ownership of the site, it cannot be deemed that the construction permit against the Plaintiff is unlawful due to this reason, and any defect in the said construction permit cannot be found otherwise.

(3) If so, the disposition to revoke the construction permit of this case is rendered without any justifiable reason, and thus, it is illegal, and it is decided as per Disposition by applying Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 89 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.

Judges Kim Do-ju (Presiding Judge)