All
| TITLE | [Provisional Disposition for Prohibition of Construction]Supreme Court Order 2004Ma1148, 1149 Dated June 2, 2006 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| [1] The case affirming the judgment of the court below holding that the salamander itself cannot be admitted to the lawsuit [2] The case holding that one cannot directly demand the prohibition of the construction of some parts of the high-speed railway from the Korea Rail Network Authority (""KRNA"") by his or her constitutional rights such as the environmental right stipulated in Article 35 (1) of the Constitution or the right to defend nature and that the provisions of environment-related statutes such as the Framework Act on Environmental Policy (""FAEP""), cannot be interpreted as the source of such specific rights (to request a prohibition against the construction) [3] The purport of Article 35 (1) of the Constitution, the provision regarding/addressing the environmental rights and the duties of the state under the provision [4] The conditions necessary for the owners of the land in the high-speed railway construction locations to seek a suspension of the construction on the ground of change of the circumstances after a Environmental Impact Assessment (""EIA"") [5] The case holding that for now it is difficult to accept the probability that the construction of a tunnel would infringe upon the environmental benefits, upon examining the facts; when implementing a tunnel construction as part of long-term high-speed railway projects covering the whole areas of the country, in order to address concerns about the infringement of environment, the KRNA requested the Korean Society of Engineering Geology (""KSEG"") to conduct an intensive investigation on the possible changes for nature, and according to that investigation and the review of the Korea Environment Institute (""KEI"") at the request of the Ministry of Environment, etc, the tunnel was found to have little impact on the environment surrounding Mountain Chunseong, etc. | |
