손실보상금
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 6,366,100 to Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 25,103,750 to Plaintiff B; (c) KRW 6,36,100 to Plaintiff C; and (d) KRW 8,07 to Plaintiff D.
1. Details of ruling;
(a) Project name (1) : Location of a housing redevelopment improvement project (2): A project implementer in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, one of the following: Defendant (4): Public notice of project implementation on May 1, 2014 (Public notice of Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City);
B. On November 25, 2016, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee (1) on the expropriation ruling on November 25, 2016 (1) ① Plaintiff A’s land in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu (hereinafter “Plaintiff A’s land”) ② Plaintiff B’s land size of 175 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff B’s land”) in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul. ③ Plaintiff C’s land size of 83 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff C’s land”) ④ Plaintiff D’s land size of 93 square meters in Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Plaintiff E’s land”) ⑤ Plaintiff E’s land size of 83 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff E’s land”) in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 139 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff F’s land”): Plaintiff G’s land size of 81 square meters in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) but did not have any obstacle to the Plaintiffs’ land appraisal.
(3) Date of commencement of expropriation: January 13, 2017.
On April 27, 2017, the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection to the compensation for losses as follows.
① Plaintiff A’s land KRW 254,735,300, ② Plaintiff B’s land KRW 834,128,750,30, ③ Plaintiff C’s land KRW 254,735,30,300, ④ Plaintiff C’s land KRW 275,526,450, ⑤ Plaintiff E’s land KRW 254,735,300, 681,54,80, and KRW 680,54,750, and KRW 249,864,750, and KRW 249,864,750, and the purport of the entire pleadings is that Plaintiff A’s land was without dispute.
2. The defendant's judgment on the defense before the merits of the case is unlawful, since the period for filing the lawsuit of this case has expired, since the lawsuit of this case was filed.
According to Articles 83 and 85(1) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter referred to as the “Public Works Act”).