The case holding that land designated as an urban design district under the Urban Planning Act after the acquisition of land, the use of which is limited for joint development with adjacent land, cannot be seen as idle land.

The case holding that land designated as an urban design district under the Urban Planning Act after the acquisition of land, the use of which is limited for joint development with adjacent land, cannot be seen as idle land.

Article 8(3) of the Land Excess Profit Tax Act, Article 23 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

Supreme Court Decision 87Nu432 delivered on November 24, 1987 (Gong1988, 180) 93Nu15946 delivered on January 14, 1994 (Gong194, 741)

Plaintiff

The director of the Southern Incheon District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 93Gu3471 delivered on October 12, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on the evidence adopted by the plaintiff, has determined that the plaintiff acquired as of December 27, 1982 and was designated as an urban design district under the Urban Planning Act on December 29, 1983 with 332.5 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the "land in this case") from the Namdong-gu, Incheon as of December 31, 1991, and was designated as a general residential area or a Class 2 scenic district, and that a building constructed within the zone pursuant to Article 8-2 (1) of the former Building Act (amended by Act No. 4381 of May 31, 1991) should be constructed in conformity with the urban design. The court below's determination that the land in this case constitutes an urban design for more than 13 years after consultation with the owners of the above adjacent land, but it cannot be viewed that the remaining land cannot be jointly developed with the owner of the land in this case for 19 years since it did not comply with the Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Chocheon-sik (Presiding Justice)