주차장 부대시설의 법적 문제에 대한 시론적 고찰 - 대법원 2015. 7. 9. 선고, 2015두39590 판결 -

Abstract

Recently the Supreme Court made important judgment on the case of 'Naegog-dong Audi Service Center' which is the case related to the subsidiary facility of an urban planning facility. This article introduces the purpose and contents of the subject precedent of the Supreme Court and aims at reaching to effective settlement of the pertinent dispute in the future through theoretical review on the legal issues related to it. The subsidiary facility of an urban planning facility means the facility which is subordinate to a main facility as a facility necessary for the functioning and use of the main facility designated as an urban planning facility. On the land for urban planning facility, the facilities other than urban planning facilities in question are not allowed to be installed in principle. However, on an exceptional basis, the facility, which may supplement the utility of the main facility being incidental to it, is allowed to be installed in the name of subsidiary facility. The automobile maintenance service facility in question in this case is the facility installed incidental to a parking lot which is an urban planning facility. The judgment of the Supreme Court made in this case seemed to have clarified the purpose and intent of the legal fictitious system of permits and approvals and to have established comparatively strict requirements and procedures for the allowance of an automobile maintenance service facility installed as a subsidiary facility of an urban planning facility. It is anticipated that this judgment will get over conceptual ambiguity related to the installment of subsidiary facilities under current laws and regulations, eradicate diversified aspects of law evasions which have been tacitly practiced so far and have big significance in setting clear standards for the deviation and abuse of discretionary power of an administrative agency as a subject of control and regulation.