logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.11.23 2017구합2160
건축허가취소처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 28, 2011, the Plaintiffs obtained a building permit (hereinafter “instant building permit”) to construct a detached house (multi-household-19 households; hereinafter “instant building”) with a total floor area of 658.62m2m2 and a building area of 318.93m2 on the ground of Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si (Gu Chungcheongbuk-gun) (hereinafter “instant land”), and the Defendant issued a report completion certificate with a scheduled date of commencement as of November 5, 2012, to the Plaintiffs on October 31, 2012.

B. On May 14, 2016, the Defendant determined that the construction of the instant building was not yet commenced as a result of the on-site inspection of the instant land, and on June 14, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiffs of the prior disposition that the instant building permit will be cancelled pursuant to Article 11(7) of the former Building Act (amended by Act No. 14535, Jan. 17, 2017; hereinafter the same) on the ground that “the construction of the instant building was not commenced within one year,” and the Plaintiff A submitted an opinion to the effect that “the construction will be commenced as soon as six months thereafter.” On July 1, 2016, the Plaintiff A could not start the construction of the instant building after being under an aviation cancer treatment.

C. On March 9, 2017, the Defendant revoked the instant building permit pursuant to Article 11(7) of the former Building Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that “The revocation of the instant building permit was postponed by reflecting the Plaintiff’s opinion, but the grace period has not expired until the date of commencement of the building.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 9, 13, Eul evidence No. 1 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion excavation works or base excavation works are at least the actual construction works for the construction of the building in question.

arrow