logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.08.14 2013구합10540
조성사업허가신청반려처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In accordance with Article 46(1) of the former Tourism Business Act (amended by Act No. 3910, Dec. 31, 1986; the Act was amended by Act No. 3910, Dec. 31, 1986); and the Defendant obtained approval from the Minister of Construction and Transportation for the creation of a national tourist destination in the Yongsan-si around December 1983 pursuant to Article 46(2) of the same Act.

After that, some of the above creation plan was changed, and the defendant obtained the approval of the extension, designation, and creation plan (amended) of Yeongdeungpo-gu Tourist Destinations around December 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the "Creation Plan for Young-gu Tourist Destinations") (hereinafter referred to as the "Creation Plan for Young-gu Tourist Destinations").

B. On December 1, 2010, the Defendant changed the business operator of a development project in the Yeongdeungpo-gun Tourist Site and permitted the change of the development project, which is part of the Yeongdeungpo-gun Tourist Tourist Site, to E, the Defendant changed the project operator of the development project of the 2554 square meters and D 2554 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Defendant to E, which was the former owner of the instant land, and permitted the Defendant to implement the development project with the content of installing the 1 second floor of accommodation facilities on the instant land.

C. On August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased the instant land from E on April 22, 2013 for the purpose of establishing and operating an unmanned telecom; and (b) applied for permission to establish accommodation facilities on the ground of the instant land (hereinafter “instant project”; and (c) applied for permission to establish the Plaintiff’s development project.

On May 2, 2013, the defendant rejected the application for permission for the development project on May 2, 2013, and the defendant applied for the permission on May 2, 2013 on the following grounds.

below ' below'- The applicant facility is not a facility used in a sound manner by families or cleaning years through accommodation or design documents as a result of the review of the design documents, which is not a facility for the sound use of tourism and agricultural culture.

arrow