logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.29 2018구합11215
공장증설승인신청 불승인처분 취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff, a corporation whose main purpose is to manufacture and sell ready-mixed products, has been from around 1986 to operate a manufacturing factory of ready-mixed products (hereinafter “instant factory”) in the area of B, C, 9,621 square meters on the ground of Pakistan.

On October 30, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval of factory enlargement (hereinafter “instant application”) to add facilities producing sand and gravel, which are main raw materials of ready-mixed, to D, and six parcels above, 13,038 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”).

Grounds for non-approval.

(a) an area in which a ice, concrete, or wood crushing company is located in the vicinity and where national highways E and F railroads adjoin, by extending forest land (9,109 square meters) and farmland (3,929 square meters) to a place of business operating an existing ready-mixed manufacturing business; or

(b) Greenbelts damage due to development activities conducted in accordance with the form and quality of land due to the alteration of the form and quality of land, and the operation of a factory has a profound impact on the residential life of residents, such as dust dust, noise, vibration, air discharge, and wastewater discharge in an area in which a neighboring collective settlement district was formed by the construction of aggregate, crushing, and traffic of large vehicles;

(c) Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and Article 56 [Attachment 1-2] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, which ordered the planned management of the national land, such as harmonious development with the surrounding environment, are inconsistent with the criteria for permission for development activities, and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport publicly notified pursuant to Articles 35 (1) and 36 (2) of the Integrated Guidelines for the Development of Industrial Sites Act (Notice of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport No. 2015-155) of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport notified that the factory location is inappropriate and thus

On November 17, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the non-approval of the application for factory extension (hereinafter “instant disposition”) for the following reasons.

[Ground of recognition] A.

arrow