logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.07.21 2015누38117
과징금부과처분취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(b) Related statutes;

(c) Fact of recognition;

D. 1) The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to the existence of the grounds for disposition is as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance. As such, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are cited as it is. 2) Article 10(1)1 of the Real Estate Real Name Act provides that where a party to a contract with the ownership transfer bears mutually quid pro quo obligations, where a party bears obligations within three years from the date the performance of the consideration is completed or only one party bears obligations, a penalty surcharge shall be imposed within the extent of an amount equivalent to 30/100 of the appraised value of the real estate on the person entitled to registration who fails to apply for the registration of ownership transfer within three years from the date the performance of the consideration is completed, and where the date prescribed in each subparagraph of Article 10(1) of the Real Estate Real Name Act has elapsed before the enforcement of the Real Estate Real Name Act, the period prescribed in the said Article shall be three years after the enforcement date of the Real Estate Real Estate Real Name Act.

arrow