손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On February 3, 2009, the Defendant was authorized by the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu Office to implement the B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “instant Improvement Project”).
B. The Plaintiff is the owner of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government D 66§³, E prior to 89§³, F-road 23С (total site) and the foregoing D and E-based three-story housing (hereinafter “instant real estate”). < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 228.86§³, which is included in the instant improvement project zone.
C. On December 14, 2015, the head of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu publicly notified G of the implementation of the instant improvement project. D.
On May 4, 2016, the Defendant notified its members, including the Plaintiff, of the amount of previous property appraisal and rights in order to obtain authorization for the instant improvement project from the head of the competent Gu. However, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the amount of “438 square meters”, “296.93 square meters”, and “743,163,563 won” (hereinafter “first appraisal value”).
E. On July 13, 2016, the head of the Incheon Bupyeong-gu Office approved and publicly notified the management and disposal plan of the instant improvement project as H of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu public notice.
F. However, on September 6, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the initial appraisal price by mistake as the number of rooms entered in a computer system. As to the instant real estate, the Defendant’s second appraisal price is “297,412,972 won” (hereinafter “the second appraisal price”) with respect to the instant real estate.
(B) re-written and re-written. [Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff trusted the said first appraisal value notified by the Defendant and carried out a relocation plan to find a new residence based on the said value.