logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.01.22 2015누6171
건축허가불허가처분취소
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 grounds alleged by the Plaintiff in the trial while filing an appeal by the court of first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Plaintiff in the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance rejecting the Plaintiff’s assertion even if both evidence submitted by the court of first instance and evidence Nos. 22 and 23 submitted by the court of first instance were examined.

Therefore, the reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows, and the reasoning for the court’s decision is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for adding the judgment as described in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act with regard to the assertion that the Plaintiff emphasizes again in the trial as follows.

Each "National Guidance 97 Line" of the fifth fourth sentence of the first instance court's decision, fourth sentence from the sixth lower to the last sentence, the seventh sentence from the seventh to the seventh, the fifth sentence from the seventh bottom, and the third under the seventh bottom from the seventh bottom to the "National Guidance 79 Line" respectively.

The following shall be added to the 8th sentence of the first instance court:

Luxembourg In addition, in a case where it is determined that the previous disposition is inappropriate, the previous disposition is not necessarily bound by the previous disposition, and even if the defendant has been permitted to build a factory in the neighboring area of the application site of this case prior to the disposition of this case, it can be permitted only for the area where the construction of a new factory is not permitted after the consideration of reflective factors about the damage of the natural environment and living environment or where there is no risk of such damage. Therefore, the disposition of this case is not in violation of the principle of equity and equality in this respect. It is added to the annexed Acts and subordinate statutes of this court in the judgment of the first instance.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff.

arrow