logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.14 2018구합66242
관광호텔업 사업계획 불승인처분 취소 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval of a tourist accommodation business plan with the content that the Plaintiff constructs a tourist hotel of the size of two underground floors, eight floors above ground, and the total floor area of 2,290.86 square meters below (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land where the wife B large 1,652 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”).

In accordance with Article 11 (4) 1 of the Building Act, when a permitting authority grants permission to construct a building that constitutes amusement facilities or lodging facilities, he/she may choose not to grant permission to construct a building on the relevant site pursuant to the provisions that "if it is deemed inappropriate in consideration of the surrounding environment, such as the residential environment or educational environment, etc., such building may not be granted after deliberation by the Building Committee, notwithstanding the provisions of this Act or other Acts)."

B. On October 13, 2017, the Defendant rejected the said application (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 13(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Tourism Promotion Act on the grounds that the content of the said tourist accommodation business business plan conflicts with the Building Act on the following grounds.

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission on January 11, 2018, but the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the said application on April 3, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is a tourist hotel with recreations, ditches, seminars, etc., which is sufficiently far away from the neighboring apartment complex, and a motorway is scheduled to be opened in the middle, so there is no risk of causing harm to the residential and educational environment, and it will contribute to the revitalization of the local economy, such as contributing to attracting tourists, as many tourist destinations around the middle.

arrow