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.

1. The reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, other than adding the following, are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Details to be added; and

A. The plaintiff's purpose of the disposition of this case is only to realize school site charges for the special public project of securing school facilities. After the decision of inconsistency with the Constitution of this case on the basis of the disposition of this case, the additional actions of the state for the ultimate realization of the law of unconstitutionality is not paid. Thus, it is allowed to refund the charges on school site charges under the premise that the legitimate usage of the disposition of this case is null and void. Accordingly, since the purpose of the disposition of this case cannot be ultimately realized, even if the defect is not clear, there is a special reason to regard it as null and void as a matter of course.

School site charges are charges for financing purposes imposed without compensation only on a specific group to cover the financial resources of the special public project to secure school facilities in the development project area.

( Constitutional Court Order 201Hun-Ga32 Decided July 25, 2013, etc.). According to Article 3 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on Collection of Charges for School Sites, charges for school sites are limited to those used for the purchase of school sites, such as purchase costs of school sites and appraisal fees, expenses incurred in the imposition and collection of charges, and development charges under Article 3 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Restitution of Development Gains Act.

However, the instant disposition was rendered in a situation where the Plaintiff had already paid school site charges prior to the determination of inconsistency with the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and thus there was no need to take any further measures for compulsory enforcement of the instant disposition, and thus, the Plaintiff accordingly.