손실보상금
1. The Defendant: 23,65,480 won to Plaintiff A; 24,80,370 won to Plaintiff B; 15,593,460 won to Plaintiff C; and 10,490 won to Plaintiff D.
1. Details, etc. of ruling;
(a) Project name: E - Project name: Defendant - Project Area: Seo-gu Busan - Public Notice of an implementation plan for an urban planning facility project: G published on February 13, 2013;
(b) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on October 24, 2013, the ruling on objection made on January 22, 2015, and the entrustment of appraisal made by this court - The date of commencement of expropriation - The date of commencement of expropriation: December 17, 2013 - The land and buildings owned by the plaintiffs in the project area - the obstacles, such as the land and buildings on the ground thereof, etc. owned by the plaintiffs in the project area - The plaintiff’
A. Adjudication of objection (won)
B. The court’s appraisal commission (won) B - A 343,151,340 354,661,480 378,326,960 23,665,480 B 321,854,070 336,301,820 361,820 361,102,190 C 24,800 C 209,423,360 222,326,140 237,919,60 15,593,460 D167,486,650 174,820,390,390,310,4610,470,307 20,3140,3140,310,3140, 214,310,314, 214
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The appraisal conducted in the adjudication of acceptance and objection against the plaintiffs is erroneous in failing to properly reflect the market price and operating loss of the obstacles, such as land and buildings, which are the objects to be expropriated, and the appraised value confirmed in the course of this court’s entrustment of appraisal should reflect the legitimate value and operating loss of the said objects to be expropriated.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiffs the difference between the appraised value of this court and the compensation for losses recognized by this ruling, and the damages for delay from the day following the date of each expropriation.
B. In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation 1, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and the court appraiser’s appraisal and assessment are not illegal in the assessment methods, and the remaining price assessment factors except for individual factors and vision are consistent with each other. However, only individual factors and vision are assessed.