logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.07.08 2014누22328
이행강제금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. On March 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition stated in the purport of the above claim and appeal with the Defendant at the court of first instance by designating the Defendant as the head of the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority, which the head of the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority filed against the Plaintiff. On August 28, 2014, the court of first instance rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on August 28, 2014, and the Plaintiff appealed. However, on August 5, 2014, the date the first instance court closed the designation of the land that served as the basis for the above disposition in the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone and transferred the above disposal authority from the head of the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority to the head of Gangseo-gu, Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority. Accordingly, it is clear in the record that the Plaintiff applied for rectification of the Defendant to the head of the Gangseo-gu, Busan High Free Economic Zone Authority to change the Defendant from the head of the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority.

Thus, the previous lawsuit against the head of the Busan High Sea Free Economic Zone Authority shall be deemed to have been withdrawn due to the correction of the defendant, and the new defendant's lawsuit against the head of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government is deemed to have been filed at the time of the first lawsuit (Article 14 (4) and (5) of the Administrative Litigation Act). Thus, this court has no need to determine the legitimacy of the judgment of the court of first instance on the lawsuit against the defendant before the correction, and as long as the trial was sufficiently conducted to the extent that it can render a judgment on the merits

2. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 30, 2012, the Plaintiff newly constructed two manufacturing businesses on the ground of the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) (hereinafter “Defendant”) with the aim of newly constructing two manufacturing businesses on the ground of the Gangseo-gu Busan Gangseo-gu 2,068 square meters and B large-scale 175 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) to the Defendant (as seen in the foregoing, there was Defendant’s correction due to his succession to the business as seen earlier, and thus, all the Defendant following the rectification of convenience).

arrow