[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-joon] Gimpo City attempted to charge the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH), the land development project operator, for the installation costs of resident-friendly facilities such as soccer fields at the sewage treatment plant, but the court put a stop to it.
The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Kim Seon-su) announced on the 3rd that it upheld the appellate court's ruling partially in favor of the plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by LH against Gimpo City seeking cancellation of the sewage system causative charge imposition.
The sewage system causative charge refers to the obligation of the party responsible for an increase in wastewater beyond a certain amount due to new construction, extension, or change of use of buildings, etc., to bear all or part of the public sewage installation costs.
LH, which carried out the land development project in the Gimpo area, signed an agreement to pay Gimpo City 183.9 billion won as the causative charge and made full payments several times between 2009 and 2012.
Subsequently, Gimpo City additionally installed sports facilities such as soccer fields and inline skating rinks on top of the treatment facilities and claimed that the installation costs of these sports facilities corresponded to the causative charge that LH should bear, demanding a revision of the causative charge agreement.
LH argued that the installation costs of the sports facilities created by Gimpo City did not correspond to the costs required for public sewage construction due to the land development project and rejected Gimpo City's request. In response, Gimpo City imposed a causative charge on LH for the amount equivalent to the installation costs, and LH filed a lawsuit seeking cancellation of the causative charge imposition.
The first trial sided with Gimpo City, stating that the project plan included costs for “greening above the sewage treatment plant,” and the resident-friendly facilities were part of that. The first trial judged that the installation costs of resident-friendly facilities were included in the “costs required for public sewage construction due to LH’s land development project” as stipulated by the Sewage Act.
However, the second trial's judgment differed. The second trial viewed that the resident-friendly facilities such as soccer fields were additional facilities installed to alleviate the negative image of the nuisance facility, unrelated to the original function of the sewage treatment facility, and thus not included in the costs stipulated by the Sewage Act.
The Supreme Court also agreed with the second trial's judgment.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
