logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.05.10 2018구합53331
이주대책대상자제외처분 취소
Text

1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 27, 2006, the Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City made a public inspection according to the proposal for the designation of the F Housing Site Development District with respect to the size of 11,240,000 square meters in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, Cdong, Ddong, and E Dongwon 11,240,000 square meters, and on February 6, 2009, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs made a public announcement of the designation, alteration, and approval of the development plan for the housing site development district of G-ro

B. The Defendant is the operator of the instant project, and the Plaintiff owned the land by inheritance from the husband on November 7, 2002, who died with H, who died on November 7, 2002, the Plaintiff owned the total area of 313.62 square meters (hereinafter “instant housing”).

C. Around December 2016, the Defendant: (a) established and publicly announced the relocation measures of the instant project; (b) among the relocation measures, the requirements for a person subject to the supply of a resettled housing site (self-owned housing site) among the relocation measures are as follows: (c) who continuously owned and continuously resided in the housing within the project district from one year before the date of the public announcement of the designation of the area subject to housing site development ( October 27, 2006) until the date of the public announcement of the designation of

I. Since January 25, 1989, an unauthorized building owner, a corporation, or an organization was excluded. D.

On January 12, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of a person to be supplied with a resettled housing site, and filed an application for a resettled housing site for concurrent use of a store with the co-owner’s agreement and the co-owner’s agreement on March 2, 2006, accompanied by evidentiary documents, such as the resident registration abstract, building ledger, the details of payment of electricity charges, and the

E. On July 28, 2017, the Defendant informed the Plaintiff of the exclusion of the person subject to relocation measures (hereinafter “the first notification”) on the ground that the Plaintiff moved after one year prior to the date of the public announcement of the designation of the planned housing site development area.

arrow