logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.01.10 2017구합104117
이주자대책대상자 부적격처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

On July 21, 2009, the Minister of Knowledge Economy designated and publicly announced the Defendant as the project implementer of the G G development project to be implemented in the Seongbuk-gu, Daejeon Cdong, Ddong, Edong, and Fdong House, which is publicly announced by the Ministry of Knowledge Economy, and the cement season and 33.05 square meters of a house with 33.05 square meters of a house with the cement type No. 2 of the Daejeon Pung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant house”) was included in the business area of the said development project, which is the said development project (hereinafter “instant project”).

J purchased the instant house from K on January 10, 209, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 13, 2009, and resided in the instant house, and sold the instant house to the Plaintiff on July 7, 2014.

The Plaintiff completed a move-in report on August 28, 2014 after completing the registration of ownership transfer on the instant housing on August 28, 2014.

On October 21, 2015, the Defendant acquired the instant house from the Plaintiff through consultation, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 28, 2015.

On July 2016, the Defendant set the criteria for the establishment of the relocation measures for the instant project. The date of the criteria for the selection of the persons subject to the relocation measures is July 21, 2009 (hereinafter “the date of the relocation measures of this case”), which is the date of the designation of the said project implementer. The Defendant set the person subject to the relocation measures for migrants, housing supply, and resettlement funds, as “the portion of ownership of housing units or housing units within the relevant project district from before the base date of the relocation measures of this case to the date of the conclusion of the compensation contract or the date of expropriation, and who

Around August 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the selection of the Plaintiff as a person subject to relocation measures, and the Defendant, on February 27, 2017, applied the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects on the ground that the Plaintiff did not continuously reside with the Plaintiff from before the base date of the relocation measures of this case until the date of concluding the compensation contract

arrow