logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1989. 12. 12. 선고 88누12097 판결
[무허가건축물철거명령등취소][공1990.2.15(866),374]
Main Issues

The case holding that the appeal against removal of a building is legitimate;

Summary of Judgment

Even if the plaintiff suffered considerable property damage by receiving a corrective order after completion of the structural and outer wall construction of the building of this case, and removing it more solidly than the existing building in the surrounding area, the plaintiff's neglect of the building illegally constructed in this case without permission is likely to impair the smooth performance of the construction administration by nullifying the authority of the administrative authority controlling it, and thus, the disposition of this case by the defendant is legitimate.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 3 of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

[Defendant-Appellant] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Defendant-Appellee

Attorney Kim Young-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant of the city of Busan Metropolitan City

Judgment of the lower court

Busan High Court Decision 88Gu780 delivered on November 18, 1988

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

Even if the plaintiff suffered considerable property damage by receiving a corrective order after completion of the structural and outer wall construction of the building of this case, more solid than the existing building in the vicinity of the building and removing it, the plaintiff's neglect of the building illegally constructed in this case without permission is likely to undermine the greater public interest, such as impairing the smooth execution of the construction administration by nullifying the power of the administrative authority controlling the building, so the disposition of this case is legitimate, and the decision of the court below that made in the same view is justified. The argument is groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won

arrow