logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.01.11 2017누75233
건축이행강제금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, with the exception of dismissal or addition of some contents, and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the

The part that is dismissed or added shall be referred to as the "construction" in the 5th judgment of the court of first instance as the "construction".

The “the deadline for correction” in Section 2 of Article 6 of the Judgment of the first instance court is raised as “the deadline for correction.” Even in the case of Section 17 of Article 10 of the Judgment of the first instance, “the owner of the instant building” shall be added as “the owner of the instant building.” The second part of Section 2 of Article 11 of the Judgment of the first instance shall read “it is difficult to recognize” (the same shall apply even if the Plaintiff neglected to state the evidence No. 37 submitted by the appellate court).

Article 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance provides that "each video listed in the evidence 6-2, 3-5, and evidence 6-1 through 34 of the evidence 6-5, and evidence 7-1 through 34 of the evidence 6-2, 3, 5-5 of the evidence 6-5, evidence 7-1 through 34, and evidence 36-1 through 6 of the evidence 36 of the first instance trial."

The prosecution of the 8th sentence of the judgment of the first instance court is appropriate. The prosecution may be inferred "it may be inferred."

2. The judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow