logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.01 2018구합11234
업무정지처분취소
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 December 31, 2017, the expiration date of the permission period, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained permission to collect earth and rocks from the Defendant on a total of 67,161 square meters of land outside Jeonnam-gun, Nam-gun; and (b) applied for extension of the period for collecting earth and rocks against the Defendant on December 22, 2017, pursuant to Daom.

B. However, if the Plaintiff did not submit a part of the required documents related to the application for the extension of the collection period of earth and rocks, the Defendant requested the Defendant to supplement the required documents. On February 5, 2018, the Plaintiff supplemented the required documents against the Defendant.

C. On February 19, 2018, the Defendant received a civil petition with the purport that the Plaintiff illegally collected and removed earth and rocks. On February 26, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of a plan to decide whether to grant permission for extension of the above period through a comprehensive review after the criminal case regarding the content of the above civil petition was terminated, and then filed a criminal complaint with the investigative agency.

After that, on April 20, 2018, the Defendant granted the Plaintiff permission to extend the period for collecting earth and rocks, and on the ground that the Plaintiff illegally collected and removed earth and rocks prior to the permission to extend the said period, the Defendant issued a disposition to suspend the collection of earth and rocks for one month against the Plaintiff on May 11, 2018 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, 7 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 3 and 5 evidence (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant disposition does not exist.

B. The instant disposition abused discretion.

3. Determination

A. The relevant laws and subordinate statutes pertaining to the instant disposition are as follows.

(1) A person who intends to collect earth or stone (including cases of processing or transporting earth or stone to any other area than a mountainous district) in a mountainous district in a forest which is not a state forest shall be the Mayor/Do Governor or a person in accordance with the following classifications, as prescribed by Presidential Decree:

arrow