1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing development charges of KRW 5,975,570 against the Plaintiff on October 13, 2014 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 6, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained a building permit for a house on the ground (hereinafter “instant house”) of 330 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) from the head of the Gu, who is the head of the Si/Ma-si, Gan-si, Gan-si, Gan-si, Gan-si, and obtained approval for the use on May 27, 2014 from the commencement of construction works around October 2013.

B. On October 13, 2014, the Defendant rendered a disposition imposing development charges of KRW 5,975,570 on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by deeming that the Plaintiff’s land category of the instant land was changed as above and the construction of housing above constitutes a development project subject to imposition of development charges under Article 5(1)7 of the Restitution of Development Gains Act (hereinafter “Development Gains Restitution Act”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) since the area of the instant land does not exceed 990 square meters, the construction of the instant land on the instant land does not constitute a development project subject to the imposition of development charges. Therefore, the instant disposition on a different premise is unlawful. Therefore, the Defendant’s land owner adjacent to the instant land at the time of September 6, 2013, which was the point of time when the instant construction permit was granted for the instant land, shall be deemed to have carried out the development project by actually dividing the connected land including the instant land into C, and as such, the total area of the adjoining land including the instant land exceeds 90 square meters, it constitutes a development project subject to the imposition of development charges.

In addition, since the plaintiff succeeded to the status of the project implementer from C before the completion of the development project, he is obligated to pay the development charges.

Even if otherwise, the owners of the adjoining land, including the Plaintiff, etc., jointly carried out the development project, and the land jointly carried out.