손실보상금
1. As to each of the Plaintiffs’ KRW 215,841,250 and each of the KRW 85,076,770, respectively, the Defendant shall from May 20, 2015 to February 15, 2019.
1. Details, etc. of ruling;
(a) Project approval and announcement 1): G project name (hereinafter “instant project”);
2) Public notice of authorization for project implementation: A public notice of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on October 14, 2014 (the I Bogeumjari Housing District published by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on May 26, 2010 before the conversion of business): Defendant
B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on March 26, 2015: JL 10,669 square meters (hereinafter “instant incorporated land”) in Hanam-si.
2) The date of commencement of expropriation: Compensation for losses: 9,378,676,850 won: K and L.
C. The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s objection No. 1 on October 22, 2015: Compensation for losses: KRW 9,791,386,950 (2): M&A and N3) remaining land (O 2,233m2, hereinafter “the remaining land of this case”).
A’s adjudication on compensation for losses: A filed a claim for expropriation of the remaining land of this case or for compensation for depreciation of its value, and the Central Land Expropriation Committee dismissed it. D. A, the owner of the incorporated land of this case and the remaining land, died on September 23, 2017, and the Plaintiffs succeeded to property as the deceased’s children (based on recognition). [The grounds for recognition] did not dispute, A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and B’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including serial numbers), the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The compensation price determined by the plaintiffs' assertion of this case does not reach the market price of the incorporated land in this case, and the remaining land in this case is expected to become a franchisium without entering the land in this case, and road conditions are considerably omitted compared to the previous land. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs the compensation amount equivalent to the difference between the legitimate compensation price of the incorporated land in this case and the above compensation price, and the compensation amount equivalent to the value decline of the remaining
B. Determination 1 on the claim for the increase of compensation for the incorporated land of this case) The incorporated land of this case is located in the village and the farming zone surrounding the urban area, and is on the expressway.