logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.30 2018구합82
산골수목원조성계획승인신청서반려취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the instant disposition

A. On June 12, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for approval of a plan to create an arboretum with the content of 744 square meters prior to C, D,389 square meters prior to D, E, forest land 25,408 square meters prior to F, F,15 square meters (hereinafter “instant application site”) in accordance with Article 7(1) and (2) of the Creation and Promotion of Arboretums Act and Article 5(1) and (2) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, which changed the form and quality of 4,615 square meters from among the said real estate, and the total area of 29,914 square meters of an arboretum on September 2017 and completed August 2020.

(hereinafter) The plan under the written application for approval of the plan for the creation of the arboretum is “the instant creation plan,” and the arboretum is “the instant arboretum,” and the relevant application is “the instant application”). In Siging City, the Plaintiff owned the area of 744 square meters prior to C, and the area of 3,389 square meters and E forest land 25,408 square meters prior to D is G ownership, and the F ditch is owned by the State.

B. On June 29, 2017, the Defendant, as indicated in attached Table 1, demanded the Plaintiff to supplement by July 21, 2017, upon notifying the Plaintiff of the supplementary matters, such as “4. Forest land shall be excluded from the site for the construction of buildings or the construction of structures,” etc. (hereinafter omitted).

On July 2017, the Plaintiff sent a reply to the request for supplementation, such as “The total of seven buildings planned 4.0 are planned in C(former) and D(former) sites, not forest land,” as shown in attached Table 1.

C. On July 24, 2017, the Defendant, as indicated in attached Table 2, demanded the Plaintiff to supplement it by August 4, 2017, when notifying the Plaintiff of the supplement matters, such as “3. Forest land shall be excluded from the site for the construction of buildings or the installation of structures,” etc. (hereinafter omitted).

Accordingly, around August 2017, the plaintiff is not a forest, but a total of seven buildings planned in '3."

arrow