logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.02.02 2016고정1214
건축법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The Defendant is a person who has leased the 503th, 504, 505 of the 5th, 504, and 505 of the building (the 9th, 1st, underground) located in Seo-gu in the war, Seo-gu.

Any person who intends to change the use of a building shall obtain permission from or file a report with the Mayor of a Special Self-Governing City, a Special Self-Governing Province

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without reporting to the competent authority on October 19, 2015, changed the use of 98.02 square meters among 503, 504, and 505 square meters of the five floors of the building for educational and research facilities (private teaching institutes) to the physical power spath (spath, shower, and spawk) which are the second class neighborhood living facilities.

Reasons for innocence

1. According to the evidence of determination as to whether the defendant can be a change of the purpose of use, the defendant is found to have used the above 503, 504, and 505 in the state of having physical facilities, as stated in the facts charged, from the former lessee D.

However, since a successor to a building, the use of which has already been changed, is also included in the alteration of use under the Building Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Do2630, Jun. 27, 2013; 2001Do3990, Sept. 25, 2001), if the use for the changed purpose is illegal, the defendant can be deemed the owner who has committed an unlawful alteration of use.

2. The prosecutor examined whether the use of a part of the building for educational research facilities (private teaching institutes) constitutes an illegal alteration of the purpose of use is an act of changing the purpose into a physical training place, i.e., the use of a part of the building for educational research facilities (private teaching institutes) as a escape room, shower room, and information

First, it is difficult to conclude that the pedagogs themselves cannot be deemed as a facility that does not fit for the use of a dance institute, and can only be used as a body training hall.

Next, according to Article 3 (1), (4) and attached Table 4 of the Daejeon Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Establishment and Operation of Private Teaching Institutes and Foreign Lessons, the defendant is operated.

arrow