"It's in Front of My Building": Court Rules Against Using Public Roads as Private Parking

A court has ruled that orders issued by local governments to building owners to restore public roads to their original state—after they had been occupied for private use such as parking lots or flower beds—are legitimate.
The 4th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Kim Young-min) recently ruled against three building owners, including a person identified as A, who had filed a lawsuit against the head of Gwanak-gu Office to cancel an "order to restore the unauthorized occupation of a road to its original state."
In November 2024, building owners including A received an order from Gwanak-gu stating, "Cadastral surveys have confirmed that the land you have been using is a road owned by the Seoul Metropolitan Government; restore it to its original state by December 2024."
A and the others had been using parts of the road as parking spaces and flower beds.
In February 2025, A and the others filed an administrative lawsuit, claiming that "the order to restore the site to its original state, based on the premise of unauthorized road occupation, is unlawful." However, the court did not accept any of their arguments.
Regarding the plaintiffs' claim that they had acquired ownership through prescription by occupying the road for a long time, the court ruled that "administrative property cannot be subject to acquisitive prescription."
Acquisitive prescription refers to a legal right that allows one to obtain ownership of real estate by occupying it peacefully for a certain period, even without initial ownership.
The court explained that the road was designated as a Seoul Metropolitan Government road in 1978, making it administrative property, and noted that A and the others failed to prove that the road was not administrative property.
The court also rejected the argument that they had "received road occupancy permits during the building permit process."
The court stated, "Road occupancy permits processed alongside building permits remain valid only to the extent necessary during the construction process," adding, "Once construction is completed, a separate road occupancy permit must be obtained."
The court ruled that the local government's action was lawful, stating, "While the restoration to the original state may partially limit the use of the plaintiffs' buildings, the public interest achieved by this measure is not outweighed by the disadvantages to the plaintiffs."
A and the others have appealed the decision.
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.