logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.08.12 2016구단50696
변상금부과처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing indemnity of KRW 2,255,100 against the Plaintiff on December 16, 2015 is revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. On December 16, 2015, the Defendant imposed an indemnity of KRW 2,255,100 (the imposition period between December 1, 2010 and November 30, 2015) based on Article 72 of the Road Act on the ground that the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building, occupied and used the instant land, which is a road without obtaining permission to occupy and use the said land, on the ground that part of the Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building B (hereinafter “instant building”) was 1.3 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The Disposition in this case is without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The instant land is not a road under the Road Act.

(2) The Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land.

Even if the building of this case was approved on September 18, 1963, and the plaintiff acquired the ownership of the building of this case and its site on June 24, 198. The plaintiff did not result from intentional negligence.

(3) On June 24, 198, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant building and its site and possessed the instant land in a peaceful and public manner with intent to own it for twenty (20) years. The Plaintiff acquired the instant land by prescription.

(4) The Defendant occupies 5.6 square meters of B large-scale 266.4 square meters owned by the Plaintiff without permission. The Defendant’s imposition of indemnity against the Plaintiff without returning unjust enrichment equivalent to land usage fees to the Plaintiff is contrary to the good faith principle.

B. First, we examine whether the instant land constitutes a road under the Road Act.

The Road Act shall apply only to a road in the form of a road, and only to a public announcement of the designation or approval of a road route and a road zone are determined and publicly announced, or to a procedure prescribed by the Urban Planning Act or the Urban Redevelopment Act.

arrow