logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.09.16 2014누40878
도로지정공고처분 취소 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment, in addition to using or adding part of the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment as stated in the following Paragraph (2). Thus, it shall be cited by the main text of Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Each “former Road Act” of the 3rd, 4th, 15th, and 5th, 18th, written or added parts of the judgment of the first instance court shall be added to each “former Building Act”.

The fourth and tenth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance (amended by Ordinance No. 2692, Apr. 1, 2013) shall be amended by "Gu Ordinance on the Construction of Sungnam-si (amended by Ordinance No. 2692, Apr. 1, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply)" (amended by Ordinance No. 2692, Apr. 1, 2013).

Article 45 (1) of the Act shall be amended to "Article 45 (1) of the former Building Act" in Part 10 of the fourth decision of the court of first instance.

Each "Building Ordinance at Sungnam-si" of the fourth, fifth, 18, and 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be subject to each "Building Ordinance at Sungnam-si" of the Gu Ordinance on Building at Sungnam-si.

"Evidence Nos. 4, 10, and Eul Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, and 11 of the judgment of the first instance court" shall be written with "Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 10, 13, 14, and Eul Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, and 17 of the judgment of the first instance."

Part 5 of the fifth decision of the court of first instance shall be followed as follows.

The Plaintiff was used as a road in the aerial photography taken in 2006 and 2012, and the Plaintiff was in use as a road. The Plaintiff was obstructed by installing cement walls and steel mills and passing the instant land in the vicinity of the boundary line of 317 square meters, 36 square meters and 46 square meters prior to J, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, the instant land and C, and the instant land and the instant land. On November 29, 2013, the Suwon District Court decided to remove cement walls and steel fences and to prohibit passing of C (2013Kahap2655) with the content that it shall not obstruct passage of C.

arrow