beta
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. The Plaintiff was the representative of the Plaintiff Company B (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and the 94.1% shares of 94.1%, and had been residing in the Gunpo-si D’s ground housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) in which the said Company entered as the owner from November 10, 2008, together with C, its wife C, as well as in the copy of the register.
B. However, on October 10, 201, the Defendant, a project implementer, designated the area including the site of the instant housing, as E development project zone (hereinafter “instant project”), and announced the residents’ public inspection of the designation of the said zone.
C. The Defendant, through the notice of implementation of countermeasures for resettlement and livelihood for the E inmate’s livelihood stability (hereinafter “the instant notice”), established the relocation measures to ensure that a person who had continued to own a house and has resided in the said house continuously from one year prior to the date of announcement for public inspection of the region’s residents until the date of conclusion of the compensation contract or the date of adjudication for expropriation, and who has received compensation for the said house from the Defendant and moves to the said house due to the implementation of the said project, shall be supplied with the said person’s housing site (the single housing site) and that a person who renounced the right to receive the said person’s housing site and requests the payment of
Since then, on March 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant to select a person as a person subject to relocation measures. However, on June 11, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff is excluded from a person subject to relocation measures pursuant to Article 78 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Public Works Act”) and relevant statutes, and additionally stated the following reasons:
(hereinafter “instant Disposition”). EF AD [Grounds for Recognition] does not dispute, each entry in Gap1 through 8 (including each number), and the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. This.