(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.8.22.선고 2019구합5254 판결

The rejection disposition by the Defendant against the Plaintiffs on November 1, 2018, such as the alteration of the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage, shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 6, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an application for the alteration, etc. of the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage with the Defendant to newly construct neighborhood living facilities (cosmetics) and detached houses (second floor and 70 meters on the ground, 193) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant application”). The Plaintiffs filed an application for the alteration of the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage (hereinafter referred to as the “instant application”).

B. On November 9, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition to reject the Plaintiffs’ application on the ground that it does not conform to Article 12 of the Ulsan Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Protection of Cultural Properties (hereinafter “instant disposition”) according to the result of deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee, “The designation of cultural heritage protection area, etc. is necessary because there are a large number of relics in the relevant project site” to the Plaintiffs.

【Fact that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1 to 3, and 6

(2) The purport of the whole pleadings, including the statements in Section B(1) to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

If the instant application site belongs to a historic and cultural environment preservation area, the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state of cultural heritage should be established pursuant to Article 13(4) of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act, but it is unclear whether there exists the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state, and even if the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state exists, it is unclear whether the instant disposition was made in accordance with such standard. Furthermore, while there is little possibility that the instant application site is likely to exist, damage to the Plaintiffs’ property due to the restriction on the construction act is a enormous difference, and the instant disposition is in violation of the principle of proportionality, thereby deviating from and abusing discretionary power.

In addition, it is against the principle of equity to refuse to file an application for permission, such as alteration of the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage in the previous city, even with respect to the land near the place of application of this case.

(b) Relevant statutes;

As shown in the attached Table-related statutes.

1) The Dog-ri So-ri So-gu So-called “instant cultural property” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant cultural property”) is recorded in the Dog-ri So-ri So-ri So-do So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-

2) As a result of the academic excavation and investigation conducted on the instant cultural heritage more than five occasions from 2012 to 2016, the Ulsan Museum confirmed the main building of the temple, such as the gold land, strong land, and yellow land, which were located in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-do, where the five excavation and investigation is located (hereinafter referred to as “rate”) 826 square meters in size 744 square meters in size and 1349 square meters in size in 207 square meters in size, among the 5th excavation and 1349 square meters in size of the instant cultural heritage.

3) On November 2, 2017, the Defendant: (a) on the ground that the lecture party, ditches, attached buildings, etc. confirmed as a result of the academic excavation and investigation conducted by the Ulsan Museum on November 2, 2017 are highly valuable as cultural properties; and (b) on the ground that the Dog-ri 826 square meters and Do-1349 square meters and Do-ri

Among them, the cultural heritage area of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "cultural heritage area of this case") was designated as the cultural heritage area of this case.

4) The instant application is located far away from the boundary of the instant cultural heritage zone to the northwest by about 23 meters in straight line.

5) On October 24, 2018, at the Ulsan Metropolitan City Cultural Heritage Committee, a field investigation was conducted on the instant application site, where the weather and waves and building fixtures were discovered in the instant application site.

6) The Ulsan Metropolitan City Cultural Heritage Committee deliberated in relation to the instant application from November 1, 2018 to November 5, 2018, determined that additional investigation and designation of a protected area are necessary as a result of confirmation that relics, etc. were scattered in the field.

7) On September 3, 2015, the Defendant prepared and publicly announced the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state around the Ulsan Metropolitan City’s designated cultural heritage, etc. (No. 2015 - 191 of the Ulsan Metropolitan City Notice No. 2015-191 of the Ulsan Metropolitan City Notice), and the instant application form was a new construction, and was designated as a first district in need of the preservation of the original form.

8) On January 2018, C, the former owner of the instant application site, filed an application with the Defendant for permission to change the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage in order to newly construct a detached house in the instant application site, but the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-permission to change the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage on February 5, 2018.

【Uncontentious facts, Gap’s evidence 6, Eul’s evidence 1 through 7, 10, 12, and 13 (branch numbers)

of each entry and video, the purpose of the entire pleading, including the number number,

D. Determination

1) Existence of the permissible standard for alteration of the current state, and whether to apply it

As seen earlier, on September 3, 2015, the Defendant prepared and announced the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state around the designation of Ulsan Metropolitan City, such as the instant cultural heritage, and publicly announced it (No. 2015-191 of the Ulsan Metropolitan City Notice). As such, there exists the permissible standard for alteration of the current state around the cultural heritage.

In addition, according to the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state around the Ulsan Metropolitan City designated cultural heritage, the new construction of the building applied for this case is impossible, and the new construction of the building is located in Zone I in need of the preservation of original form. Thus, the instant disposition denying the new construction of neighborhood living facilities and detached houses regarding the instant application site may be deemed to be in accordance with the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state of the designated cultural heritage surrounding

Therefore, it is unclear whether or not there exists the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state of the plaintiffs, and even if the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state is established, it is unclear whether or not the disposition of this case was made in accordance with such standard is without merit.

2) Whether the instant disposition is lawful

Cultural heritage is a national and national heritage of outstanding historic, artistic, academic, and scenic value, and it is difficult to recover if it is damaged once, and there is a huge cost and time to recover. Therefore, there is a growing need to protect cultural heritage in light of the fact that various development activities are likely to increase, and even if it is the outer space of the protection area of cultural heritage, there is a need to limit it in the event that there is a concern over affecting the preservation of cultural heritage due to development activities. In restricting development activities, the public interest elements such as the possibility of damaging cultural heritage due to the development activities, the content of the development activities, the degree of infringement of people's property rights due to the restriction on development activities, etc., and the private interest elements such as the degree of damage to cultural heritage due to the development activities (see Supreme Court Decisions 2008Du1672, May 15, 2008; 2001Du16661, Jan. 28, 2005, etc.).

In full view of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by adding the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire pleadings, the public interest, which is the preservation and maintenance of cultural heritage of this case and its surrounding landscape, achieved through the instant disposition, is no more than the disadvantage the plaintiffs suffered due to the instant disposition. Therefore, even if considering the various circumstances asserted by the plaintiffs, it is difficult to view the instant disposition as an unlawful disposition that violates the principle of equity, or deviates from or abused discretion, in violation of the principle of proportionality. Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ assertion on this part is rejected.

① Article 3 of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act declares that the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage shall be the basic principle of maintaining its original form. Since the scope of the preservation of cultural heritage includes a historical and cultural environment that sets up cultural heritage, it is more appropriate to keep the current state, rather than to build any building on the site of the instant application located within 23 meters near the instant cultural heritage area.

② Since the instant application only differs from the boundary of the instant cultural property area to the extent of 23 meters, if the Plaintiffs entered a second-story house on the instant application site, the said house seems to be exposed to the Bai-si in the instant cultural property.

③ Following deliberation by the Ulsan Metropolitan City Cultural Heritage Committee, the Plaintiffs rejected the application for the alteration of the present state of this case, and the Defendant took the instant disposition by respecting the result of deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee as above. As such, the instant disposition made following deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee was special.

Unless there are circumstances, it shall be reasonable and reasonable to respect it.

④ On February 5, 2018, the Defendant rendered a disposition of non-permission regarding an application for permission, such as the alteration of the current state of designated cultural heritage at the time of application by C, the owner prior to the instant application site, on January 1, 2018.

⑤ According to the standards for permitting the alteration of the current state surrounding designated cultural heritage of Ulsan Metropolitan City publicly notified by the Defendant prior to the instant disposition, construction of a new building is impossible due to the strict application of the permissible standard for alteration of the current state at issue, and is located within Zone 1 that requires the preservation of the original form.

④ The Defendant permitted the alteration of the present state surrounding cultural heritage, including Si-designated cultural heritage, etc., to the Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, a neighboring area of the instant application site. However, after the Defendant permitted the alteration of the present state of the present cultural heritage surrounding the Si-designated culture, etc., the instant cultural heritage area was additionally designated as the instant cultural heritage area, and according to the permissible standards for the alteration of the present state surrounding the Ulsan Metropolitan City, which was publicly notified by the Defendant, the instant application site was impossible to be newly built, and the original land was designated as the first area in need of the preservation. Accordingly, it is difficult to deem that the instant disposition contravenes the principle of equity.

1. No. 1 No. 2018, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2015, No. 30, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2014

④ The instant application is located in one district where it is impossible to newly construct a building in compliance with the permissible standard for the alteration of the current state surrounding designated cultural heritage in Ulsan Metropolitan City; the Ulsan Metropolitan City Cultural Heritage Committee, as a result of deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee, determined that additional investigation and designation of cultural heritage protection zone is necessary as many relics are scattered in the instant application site; according to the GISnet system of the Cultural Heritage Administration, some of the instant application site appears to be included in the area where buried cultural heritage remains, it is difficult to deem the instant disposition to be an excessive infringement on the Plaintiffs’ property rights even if the Defendant’s instant disposition considered the public interest, such as the preservation and management of the historical and cultural environment surrounding the instant application site.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed in entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges

Judges Gangwon-do;

Judges Lee Jae-py

Judge Lee Jong-soo

Note tin

1) The plaintiffs stated in the column of the complaint that "the date of disposition is November 8, 2018," but this seems to be a clear clerical error in the complaint " November 9, 2018."

as above. The correction shall be made.

2) Around August 2012 permission was granted.

Site of separate sheet

Relevant statutes

▣ 문화재보호법

Article 2 (Definitions)

(2) The term "designated cultural heritage" in this Act means the following cultural heritage:

2. City/Do-designated cultural heritage: Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan Autonomous City Mayor, Do Governor, or Special Self-Governing Province Governor (hereinafter referred to as "City/Do").

(g) Cultural heritage designated by the Corporation pursuant to Article 70(1).

Article 3 (Basic Principle of Protection of Cultural Heritage)

The basic principle of the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage shall be the maintenance of its original form.

Article 4 (Responsibilities of State, Local Governments, etc.)

(1) The State shall establish and implement comprehensive policies for the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage.

(2) Local governments shall take measures for the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage, in consideration of the State's measures and regional characteristics.

Establishment and promotion shall be conducted.

(3) Where the State and local governments plan and implement various development projects, they shall protective facilities and protective outfits of cultural heritage or cultural heritage.

Efforts shall be made to ensure that historical and cultural environments are not damaged.

(4) Citizens shall actively cooperate with the State and local governments in policies for the preservation and management of cultural heritage.

Article 13 (Protection of Preservation Areas of Historical and Cultural Environments)

(1) A Mayor/Do Governor shall have the history of designated cultural heritage (excluding cultural heritage and intangible cultural heritage belonging to movable property; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article).

In order to protect a cultural environment, an area for the preservation of a historic and cultural environment shall be determined by municipal ordinance.

(2) An administrative agency in charge of the authorization, permission, etc. of construction works shall take charge of the outer boundary of designated cultural heritage.

In the case of construction works to be implemented in the outside area of the protection zone (referring to the boundary of the protection zone) in accordance with paragraph (1);

Authorization and permission for construction works in a historical and cultural environment preservation area determined by the Do Governor;

(1) An act that is likely to affect the preservation of designated cultural heritage before the execution of the construction project is made;

In such cases, the relevant administrative agency shall consider whether it is a party, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Any expert’s opinion shall be heard.

(3) The scope of a historic and cultural environment preservation area shall be limited to the historical, artistic, academic, and scenic value of the relevant designated cultural heritage and refund to its surrounding areas.

In consideration of matters necessary for the protection of cultural heritage, etc., it shall be within 500 meters from the outer boundary.

Provided, That a case that is outside 500 meters from the outer boundary of designated cultural properties due to the characteristics, locational conditions, etc. of cultural properties;

500 meters where the relevant construction works are deemed certain to affect cultural heritage;

set forth in subsection (1) of this section.

(4) The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration or a Mayor/Do Governor shall designate cultural heritage within six months from the date the designation is publicly notified.

Detailed standards for acts that may affect the preservation of designated cultural heritage in the environment preservation area;

shall be determined and publicly notified.

(5) Where the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration intends to establish specific standards for acts under paragraph (4), he/she shall determine the competent Mayor/Do Governor or the competent Si/Gun/Gu office.

The head of the Gu (referring to the head of an autonomous Gu; hereinafter the same shall apply) shall provide necessary data to the head of the Gu, and the Mayor/Do Governor shall provide the head of the Gu.

or may require the submission of an opinion.

(6) Construction works implemented in an area for which detailed standards for acts under paragraph (4) are publicly announced within the scope of such standards.

With respect to the resignation, the review under paragraph (2) shall be omitted.

(7) Detailed matters necessary for the procedures for submitting data or opinions shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism.

Article 35 (Matters to be Permitted)

(1) A person who intends to engage in any of the following activities with respect to State-designated cultural heritage (excluding national intangible cultural heritage; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) shall obtain permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and even where he/she intends to modify permitted matters, he/she shall obtain permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration: Provided, That he/she shall obtain permission from the Special Self-Governing City Mayor, Special Self-Governing Province Governor, or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu (including permission for modification) for minor activities prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as installing

1. Altering (including making a specimen or stuffing a natural monument) the current state of State-designated cultural heritage (including its protective facilities and protection zone, and dead natural monument), which is an act prescribed by Presidential Decree;

2. Acts prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, which may affect the preservation of State-designated cultural heritage (excluding cultural heritage classified as movable property).

3. Capturing or collecting State-designated cultural heritage in an area designated or provisionally designated as a scenic area or natural monument, or in its protection zone, or removing it out of such area;

(2) Where permission is obtained from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration, Special Self-Governing City Mayor, Special Self-Governing Province Governor, or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu pursuant to paragraph (1) 2 in an area where a historic and cultural environment preservation area of State-designated cultural heritage and City/Do-designated cultural heritage overlaps, permission shall be deemed obtained from

(3) The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration may delegate permission to revise minor matters prescribed by Presidential Decree, among matters permitted for an act that may affect the preservation of State-designated cultural heritage under paragraph (1) 2, to the Mayor/Do Governor.

Article 36 (Criteria for Permission)

(1) The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration and the Special Self-Governing City Mayor, Special Self-Governing Province Governor, and the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall grant permission

Upon receipt of an application for permission, permission shall be granted only where the act subject to such application meets the following standards:

1. It shall not affect the preservation and management of cultural heritage;

2. They shall not damage the historical and cultural environment of cultural heritage;

3. The plan shall conform to the master plan for cultural heritage and the annual implementation plan under Article 7.

(2) The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration and Metropolitan Autonomous City Mayors, Special Self-Governing Province Governor, and the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall grant permission

If necessary, a related expert may be allowed to conduct an investigation, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 70 (Designation, etc. of City/Do-designated Cultural Heritage)

(1) The Mayor/Do Governor shall preserve cultural heritage in his/her jurisdiction but not designated as State-designated cultural heritage.

A City/Do-designated cultural heritage may be designated as City/Do-designated cultural heritage.

(2) The Mayor/Do Governor shall sentences that he/she deems necessary for preserving local culture among cultural heritage not designated pursuant to paragraph (1).

may be designated as fire data.

(5) Matters necessary for the procedures for the designation and cancellation of City/Do-designated cultural heritage and cultural heritage resources, management, protection, fostering, public disclosure, etc. thereof.

The Municipal Ordinance of local governments shall be prescribed.

Article 71 (Establishment of City/Do Cultural Heritage Committees)

(1) A City/Do shall investigate and deliberate on matters concerning the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage within the jurisdiction of the Mayor/Do Governor.

The Cultural Heritage Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "City/Do Cultural Heritage Committee") shall be established in the Cultural Heritage Committee.

(2) Matters concerning the organization, operation, etc. of City/Do cultural heritage committees shall be prescribed by municipal ordinances, including the following matters:

section 22.

1. Matters concerning the investigation and deliberation related to the preservation, management, and utilization of cultural heritage;

Article 74 (Applicable Provisions)

(1) Article 39 (1) through (5) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the exportation or removal of City/Do-designated cultural heritage and cultural heritage resources. (2) Articles 27, 31 (1) and (4), 32 through 34, 35 (1), 36, 37, 40, 42 through 45, 48, 49, and 81 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the designation, cancellation, and management of City/Do-designated cultural heritage and cultural heritage resources. In such cases, "the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration" shall be construed as "the Mayor/Do Governor," "Presidential Decree" as "the competent City/Do Ordinance," and "the State" as "the local government."

▣ 구 문화재보호법 시행령 ( 2018 . 12 . 4 . 대통령령 제29328호로 개정되기 전의 것 )

Article 21-2 (Acts of Alteration of Current State of State-designated Cultural Heritage)

(2) "Acts prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 35 (1) 2 of the Act means the following acts:

1. Any of the following acts conducted within a historic and cultural environment preservation area:

(a) Installing or expanding a building or facility which is likely to impair the landscape of the relevant State-designated cultural heritage;

(b) Planting or removing trees which are likely to impair the landscape of the relevant State-designated cultural heritage;

(c) An act that causes noise, vibration, malodor, etc., which may affect the preservation of the State-designated cultural heritage concerned, or discharges air pollution substances, chemical substances, dust, light, heat, etc.;

(d) Excavation at least 50 meters underground, which may affect preservation of the State-designated cultural heritage concerned;

(e) Altering the form and quality of land or forest that may affect preservation of the State-designated cultural heritage concerned;

2. Construction works conducted in a water system that may affect the water quality and quantity of the waterways in an area where State-designated cultural heritage is located;

3. An act that may affect preservation of State-designated cultural heritage by damaging a historic site connected to State-designated cultural heritage;

4. Affixing a mark on the nes or eggs of a natural monument or collecting or damaging the nes or eggs thereof in an area where a natural monument inhabits or reproduces;

5. Other acts conducted in an area outside the outer boundary of State-designated cultural heritage, which the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration or the head of the relevant local government-invested organization deems likely to affect the historical, artistic, academic, and scenic value of State-designated cultural heritage and publicly announce.

▣ 울산광역시 문화재보호 조례

Article 11 (Matters to be Permitted)

(1) A person who intends to engage in any of the following activities concerning Si-designated cultural heritage or Si-designated cultural heritage materials shall obtain permission from the Mayor, as prescribed by rule, and the same shall also apply to revisions to permitted matters; c) for minor activities prescribed by rule, such as installation of information signs and warning signs in the protection zone for Si-designated cultural heritage or Si-designated cultural heritage materials;

1. Altering the current state of Si-designated cultural heritage or Si-designated cultural heritage materials (including protective facilities and protection zones);

2. An act that may affect the preservation of Si-designated cultural heritage or data on Si-designated cultural heritage (excluding cultural heritage classified as movable property);

3. Depositing, printing, or photographing a copy of, data on a Si-designated cultural heritage or Si-designated cultural heritage, or photographing such data, which is likely to affect the preservation thereof;

4. Capturing or collecting animals, plants, or minerals within an area designated or provisionally designated as a Si-designated monument or within its protection zone, and transporting them out of such area;

(2) A person who intends to remove Si-designated cultural heritage or Si-designated cultural heritage materials from the jurisdiction of a Si shall obtain permission from the Mayor (including permission for revision): Provided, That this shall not apply to removal following sale and purchase, transfer, or the relocation of a City/Do to another City/Do by the owner.

Article 12 (Criteria for Permission)

(1) Where the head of a Si receives an application for permission pursuant to Article 11 (1), he/she shall grant permission only when the act subject to such application meets the following standards:

1. It shall not affect the preservation and management of cultural heritage;

2. They shall not damage the historical and cultural environment of cultural heritage;

3. The master plan for cultural heritage under Article 6 of the Act and annual implementation plans for Ulsan Metropolitan City cultural heritage under Article 7 of the Act shall be appropriate;

4. cultural heritage shall be taken out for display, etc. of cultural heritage;

(2) If necessary for granting permission under paragraph (1), the head of a Si may have relevant experts conduct an investigation, as prescribed by the Rules.

Article 42 (Protection of Preservation Areas of Historical and Cultural Environments)

(1) With respect to JD construction works that the head of a Si/Gun/Gu (hereafter referred to as "administrative agency" in this Article) intends to implement in an area outside the outer boundary (referring to the boundary of a protection zone designated) of cultural heritage pursuant to Articles 12 and 13 of the Act, the scope of areas to be examined as to whether the implementation of the relevant construction works affects a historical and cultural environment preservation area before granting authorization, permission, etc. for such construction works shall be as follows: Provided, That where the head of a Si/Gun/Gu deems it inevitable in consideration of the characteristics, locational conditions, etc. of cultural heritage, he/she may specifically determine and publicly notify separate scope for each cultural heritage within the scope not affecting the preservation of the relevant cultural heritage and not hindering the landscape, etc., if the relevant cultural heritage is State-designated cultural heritage, he/she shall consult in advance

1. 200 meters from the outer boundary (referring to the outer boundary of a protection zone, if a protection zone is designated) of cultural heritage in cases of a residential, commercial or industrial area in an urban area referred to in Article 36 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act;

2. 500 meters from the outer boundary (referring to the outer boundary of a protection zone, where a protection zone is designated) of cultural heritage in cases of areas other than the residential areas, commercial areas, and industrial areas referred to in subparagraph 1;

3. Where any of the following construction works is implemented even in an area outside the scope referred to in subparagraphs 1 and 2:

(a) Construction works or construction works or construction works, such as embankments, which are conducted at the upstream of a water system that may cause or affect water pollution in an area designated as cultural heritage;

(c) A building project that is likely to damage historic sites connected to cultural heritage or disturb the ancient scenery or historical, cultural, or natural environment;

(2) Where an administrative agency intends to grant authorization, permission, etc. for construction activities in an area falling under any subparagraph of paragraph (1), it shall examine the following matters before granting such authorization, permission, etc. for the construction engineer:

1. Whether the size, height, location, shape, etc. of the building or facilities is in harmony with cultural heritage;

2. Whether the landscape and view around the cultural heritage has been damaged;

3. Whether it is likely to cause noise, vibration, etc. that may affect the preservation of cultural heritage during or after construction, or to emit sewage, wastewater, harmful gases, chemical substances, dust or heat.

4. Whether an act of excavating at least 50 meters underground that may affect the preservation of cultural heritage is accompanied by such act;

5. Whether the water quantity has been changed or the water quality has been polluted;

6. Whether such act interferes with the ancient landscape, historic history, culture, natural environment, etc.;

7. Whether buried cultural heritage is packaged;

(3) Upon receipt of an application for authorization or permission for construction works, etc., an administrative agency shall verify whether the relevant construction works fall under the subject matter of review pursuant to paragraph (1) and, in such cases, seek advice from relevant experts, including members of the Committee, based on an application for authorization, an application for permission, a project plan, etc., and conduct an on-site investigation if necessary.

1. Where cultural heritage likely to be affected is a State-designated cultural heritage, it shall be disposed of with permission from the Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration;

2. Where cultural heritage that is likely to be affected is a Si-designated cultural heritage, the treatment shall be completed with the permission of the Mayor (the alteration of the current state).

참조조문

-국토의 계획 및 이용에 관한 법률 제36조

참조판례

-대법원 2005. 1. 28. 선고 2004두10661 판결

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2021.02.03 2020고정4

-춘천지방법원 2017.01.19 2015노666

-울산지방법원 2021.3.25. 선고 2020구합5625 판결

-춘천지방법원 2017.1.19.선고 2015노666 판결

-창원지방법원 2017.06.28 2017고정382