Whether or not the land acquired by a corporation for housing construction is excluded from the land for non-business use of the corporation, in case where it is not used for its original purpose because it is designated as a scenic

Since land acquired by a corporation for the purpose of housing construction is designated as a scenic and scenic zone under the Urban Planning Act and is prohibited and restricted by relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, so long as it is not used for that purpose, "justifiable cause" under Article 142 (1) 1-7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act and Article 75-2 (4) of the Enforcement Rule of the Local Tax Act falls under "where the use is prohibited or restricted by relevant Acts and subordinate statutes," and

Article 188 of the Local Tax Act; Article 142 (1) 1 and 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act; Article 75-2 subparagraph 4 of the Enforcement Rule of the Local Tax Act; Articles 4, 18, and 19 of the Urban Planning Act; Article 144 and Article 145 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act

Central Industrial Company

The head of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government shall record the records of the litigation performer, transplant;

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu134 delivered on October 24, 1978

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The plaintiff's ground of appeal No. 2 is examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below recognized the facts that the land of this case is located within the scenic area of 133 1,139 square meters, 11-32 land of this case as well as the 11-32-247 square meters under the Urban Planning Act, while according to Articles 144 and 145 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act, the construction of buildings is allowed within the limited range such as the minimum available rate of the site area and the height of buildings, etc., as long as the construction of the buildings does not harm natural scenic and scenic view in the land within the scenic area of the urban planning, the land of this case is located within the scenic area of Hannam-dong 11-dong 11,139, 11-32 land of this case as well as the 32-247 square meters under the Urban Planning Act.

However, since the above land was designated as a scenic and scenic zone through urban planning, it is prohibited in principle from changing the form and quality of the above land or constructing a building on the above land for the purpose of housing construction, which is one of the original purposes of the Plaintiff corporation pursuant to Articles 4 and 19(1) of the Urban Planning Act. However, according to Articles 144 and 145 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act, construction activities within a scenic and scenic zone shall be limited to cases where permission is obtained from the head of the competent Si/Gun. Under Articles 144 and 145 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act, construction activities within a scenic and scenic zone shall be limited to building-to-land ratio, change of form and quality, location, environment, etc. prescribed by ordinances of the local government concerned within the extent that does not harm natural landscape. Thus, construction activities of the above land shall be prohibited or restricted by the above laws and regulations, and construction activities of the above land shall be limited to cases where the Plaintiff corporation acquired the above land for the purpose of housing construction, but it shall be excluded from the above land for the purpose of Article 14 through 7(1).

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of the above related Acts and subordinate statutes. Accordingly, the court below's judgment 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 on the bench.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)