logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1992. 8. 14. 선고 91누11582 판결
[택지개발예정지구지정처분취소][공1992.10.1.(929),2683]
Main Issues

Whether the approval of the housing site development plan is administrative disposition against the implementer of the scheduled housing site development area and the housing site development project (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

The Minister of Construction and Transportation's designation of the prearranged area for housing site development under Article 3 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act and approval of the housing site development plan for the executor of the housing site development project by the Minister of Construction and Transportation under Article 8 of the same Act shall be subject to administrative disposition, because the location, area, details of rights, etc. of the land to be developed by the public notice of such disposition are specified, the right to execute the housing site development project is established after the project operator is granted the right to accommodate under the condition that it will go through certain procedures, and the rights and legal interests of the specific individual are regulated individually and specifically,

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 3 and 8 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jae-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-Appellee)

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff 1 and 2 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant Kim Jong-woo

Defendant-Appellee

The Minister of Construction and Transportation and one other, the defendants et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Intervenor joining the Defendant

Korea National Housing Corporation’s Intervenor’s Intervenor (Attorney Kim Dong-sik, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu6162 delivered on September 27, 1991

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. The Minister of Construction and Transportation’s designation of the planned area for housing site development under Article 3 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act and approval of the housing site development plan for the executor of the housing site development project under Article 8 of the same Act are specified by the public notice of the said disposition, so the right to execute the housing site development project after which the project executor is granted the right to expropriate under the condition that the area of the land to be developed, the right to expropriate should go through a certain procedure, and as notified, the rights and legal interests of a specific individual are individually and specifically regulated, each of the above dispositions by the Minister of Construction and Transportation shall have the nature of the administrative disposition (see Supreme Court Decision 80Nu105, Mar. 9, 1982; Supreme Court Decision 86Nu256, Aug. 19, 196; each of the above dispositions by the government is merely merely an internal plan publicly notified to the citizens, and there is no ground for appeal to the effect that it is not an administrative disposition.

2. In Article 3(2) of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, when the Minister of Construction and Transportation intends to designate a planned housing site development area, he shall hear the opinion of the head of the local government concerned and then refer to the opinion of the head of the local government concerned, and it is interpreted that the above provision should be disposed of according to the opinion of the head of the local government concerned. Thus, there is no reason to interpret that the above provision should be disposed of by driving away from the opinion of the head

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1991.9.27.선고 91구6162
본문참조조문