logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.07.03 2018누41664
건축이행강제금부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, is that the court of first instance, "the disposition of this case", "the disposition of this case", "the disposition of this case", "the disposition of this case",

) As for “the limit of permission” in Part 10 of the same face, “the limit of permission” in Part 6, and “the enforcement of the Special Act ( March 25, 2007)” in Part 9 are as follows: “The grounds of the first instance judgment are the same with the reasons of the first instance judgment, except in the case where “the enforcement of the Special Act ( March 25, 2007)” is deemed to be “the enforcement of the Special Act”. Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow