1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

Around 2015, the Plaintiff built a temporary bridge in Nowon-si, 2015 and used it as a passage, and around 2017, the Plaintiff added construction using meme, concrete, etc. on the passage road that was previously used as a money collected by residents.

On June 12, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “The Plaintiff requested the restoration of the unlawful structure (E, hereinafter “the instant structure”) installed without permission within the original city’s national river (D) in the original city. However, the instant structure was not restored up to now. In particular, as the relevant unlawful structure was partially lost due to the centralized care, it was confirmed that the implementation of an additional illegal act (refembation and recovery) was conducted by June 25, 2018, the Defendant requested the restoration of the unlawful structure by June 25, 2018 pursuant to Article 69 of the River Act.”

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【The ground for recognition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Nos. 1 and 14, each entry and video of Gap’s No. 1 and 14, and the purport of the entire pleading of this case’s Disposition

The plaintiff requested the original city, Gangwon-do, and the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission to build various passages, but the civil petition was not resolved, and the structure of this case was installed to solve the problem of passage inevitably.

Since the instant disposition is the most beneficial to the Plaintiff among various means to achieve the administrative purpose, it violates the principle of necessity (minimum infringement principle). Since the instant disposition is larger than the public interest to achieve the risk of suffering and disaster suffered by the residents belonging to the Plaintiff, the instant disposition was also in violation of the principle of reasonableness.

Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked because it is unlawful in violation of the principle of administrative proportionality.

(1) A person who intends to perform an act falling under any of the following subparagraphs in a river area under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes: