logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2017.11.02 2017누4061
전기사업(태양광발전)불허가처분 취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 4, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed an application for the permission of the electrical business with the following contents to the Defendant (hereinafter “each of the instant applications”).

The details of the applications filed by the Plaintiff are as follows: 380V/22,90V - The supply voltage: 380V/ The supply voltage: 60Hz - The equipment capacity: F, E (land: 1,457mm2) "F, Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, and H (land: 1,457m2): The supply voltage: 380 V/22,90 V/ The supply voltage: 60 Hz - the equipment capacity: 99kWp 36m2" (land: 1,457m2) - The supply voltage: 380V/2,900 V - the equipment capacity: 600m2: the equipment capacity: 99kW 36m2" and H (land: 1,457m2) ".

B. On November 8, 2016, the Defendant: (a) stated that each of the instant applications is “Article 7(1)2 of the Guidelines for the Operation of the Permission for Development Activities of Jindo-gun” (Evidence A5) as “Article 7(1)1 of the Guidelines for the Operation of the Permission for Development Activities of Jindo-gun” (hereinafter “instant Guidelines”); (b) However, according to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes as seen thereafter, it appears to be a clerical error in the “Article 7(1)1 of the Guidelines for the Operation of the Permission for Development Activities of Jindo-gun-gun-gun-gun-Gun”.

Pursuant to the notice, each of the instant applications was rejected (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).

C. The instant guidelines were issued by Jindo-gun’s Directive No. 405, and were implemented October 4, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Eul evidence 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) Article 7 (1) 1 of the Guideline that power generation facilities should not be located within 200 meters in a straight line from the main roads (hereinafter "instant provision")

The National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”)

. The National Land Planning and Utilization Act;

arrow