beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.07.22 2015구합24088

수용보상금증액청구의 소

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,537,300 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 31, 2015 to July 22, 2016.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Business name B (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): A public notice of business approval - Public notice of business approval - Public notice of implementation plans - Public notice of change of implementation plans in Daegu Metropolitan City on October 22, 2012: D public notice of change of implementation plans on September 22, 2014 : Defendant

B. The adjudication of expropriation made on December 19, 2014 by the Daegu Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “Seoul Metropolitan City Land Expropriation Committee”) - The land in this case is assessed as a road and river in accordance with the current use of each land in this case, and the land in this case is assessed as a design rent down payment, which is the damage incurred by the Plaintiff’s rejection of an application for building permission that was planned on each land in this case, as shown in attached Form 1; the date of expropriation; the date of expropriation; the appraiser: the Korea Appraisal Board; the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter the said appraisal referred to as “Expropriation appraisal”) and the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter the said appraisal referred to as “an appraisal of expropriation”):

C. The Central Land Tribunal rendered an objection on October 22, 2015 - An appraiser: one appraisal corporation, one appraisal corporation, and one-day appraisal corporation (hereinafter “the said appraisal”) - The Plaintiff’s objection shall be dismissed on the basis of the arithmetic mean of the appraisal results of the appraiser.

The court's entrustment of appraisal to appraiser H (hereinafter "court appraisal") - The appraisal of E and F land in each of the instant lands in accordance with the use status as the road and river appraisal and appraisal of this ruling, and the calculation of compensation as shown in attached Table 2 is without any dispute. The entries and images of Gap's evidence 1 through 3, Eul's evidence 1 through 6 (including the number of pages), the result of the court's entrustment of appraisal to appraiser H, the purport of the entire pleadings, as a result of the court's entrustment of appraisal to appraiser H,

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 of this case.