logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.11.13 2015구합4501
수분양권확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project association with the aim of promoting housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter “instant redevelopment project”) by setting the business area of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant project area”) as the business area, and obtained authorization for the implementation of the project from the head of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on December 11, 2014.

The Plaintiff is the owner of Eunpyeong-gu D 201 of Eunpyeong-gu in the instant business area.

B. On December 31, 2014, to February 28, 2015, the Defendant publicly announced the details of the application for parcelling-out by setting the period for application for parcelling-out as the period from December 31, 2014 to February 28, 2015. On December 29, 2014, the Defendant notified the owners of lands, etc. within the instant project zone of the application for parcelling-out (hereinafter referred to as “the first application for parcelling-out”). The Defendant extended the period for application for parcelling-out from March 1, 2015 to March 20, 2015, and notified the owners of lands, etc. within the instant project zone of the guidance for the application for parcelling-out (hereinafter referred to as “second application for parcelling-out”).

The plaintiff did not apply for parcelling-out within the above period of application for parcelling-out.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including the relevant branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In the housing redevelopment project for the plaintiff's assertion, the notification of the guidance for application for parcelling-out to the owners of lands, etc. is an important procedure to determine whether to lose the ownership and whether to grant the right to parcelling-out, so the housing redevelopment project association, as the owner of lands, etc., shall have the written guidance for application for parcelling-out reached directly the owners of lands, etc. so that the owners of lands, etc. can exercise their rights appropriately, and even if the owners of lands

However, the plaintiff's neighbors are the first.

arrow