1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff owned obstacles, such as pentyang-gu B and C (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) on the ground surface of Goyang-gu, Seoyang-gu (hereinafter “instant land”).

On February 9, 2017, the Defendant deposited the compensation money on March 29, 2017, following the adjudication of expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant expropriation adjudication”) on each of the instant lands incorporated into the instant project district as an implementer of an urban development project D (hereinafter “instant project”).

On July 13, 2018, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not voluntarily relocate the instant obstacles, the Defendant issued an order to take measures to perform administrative vicarious execution and collect expenses incurred therein (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff on July 13, 2018, pursuant to Article 89 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) and Article 3(1) of the Administrative Vicarious Execution Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-1-2, Eul evidence 2-2, and Eul evidence 3-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate is not subject to vicarious execution since the plaintiff's obligation to transfer the obstacles of this case does not correspond to the alternative duty to act, and it does not stipulate the duty to remove obstacles to the owner of the obstacles under the Land Compensation Act. Thus,

The land subject to the disposition of this case was specified as each land of this case, and thereafter the vicarious execution warrant included not only the land of this case but also E. The above vicarious execution warrant is unlawful since it is for removing the plaintiff's office established in F and G.

On July 2, 2018, the Plaintiff removed and removed obstacles to the ground surface B and completed relocation, and concrete packaging remains.

Even if there is no acceptance ruling and compensation.