logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.11.10 2016가단219647
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that on April 21, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained permission for the use of State property from the Defendant, who is the managing authority of 16,635.6 square meters of the land for 16,635.6 square meters of the land for the Nam-gu Incheon Dong-gu, Incheon, which is a State-owned property. The Defendant illegally announced the public announcement by attaching a location map and a field photograph of land smaller than 92.5 square meters at the time of the public announcement of the public announcement of the selection of State property. The Plaintiff participated in the bidding procedure in trust in the location and size of the site for the use of State property and obtained the permission for the use of State property before the date of revocation of the disposition of the permission for the use of State property after obtaining the permission for the use of State property, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to compensate for the damages.

2.The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in the entry in Gap evidence 1 to 11, and Eul evidence 1 to 22 (including the branch numbers), together with the whole purport of the pleadings:

(1) On March 12, 2015, the Defendant issued a public notice of the Defendant’s bid to select a user of State property and the permission to use the land for 92.5 square meters among the 16,635 square meters of the land for the railroad site B in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City: The purpose of use: Sales stores; the period of permission to use: 5 years from the date of permission; the public notice of the selection of a user of State property was given by attaching the location map and a field photograph of the land attached in attached Table 1; and the Plaintiff was selected as a successful bidder after the bid was conducted; 2) on April 21, 2015, the Defendant added the following conditions of permission to the Plaintiff, and the period of use was from May 1, 2015 to April 30, 2020.

No employee of any condition of permission shall engage in any of the following conduct without the approval of the defendant:

1. Change of the purpose of use;

2. Change of the original state of the permitted property; and

arrow