(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.09.19 2019구합20664

손실보상금증액청구의 소


1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,446,450 as well as 5% per annum from January 31, 2019 to September 19, 2019 to the Plaintiff.


1. Details of ruling;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 433 square meters of forest land C and 433 square meters of forest land (hereinafter “instant land”) and 2,680 square meters of land for D (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On February 29, 1980, the Defendant set up and owned the transmission tower on the ground of the instant land No. 1 (hereinafter “instant transmission tower”).

As a project implementer of electric source development business [E] (hereinafter “instant business”), the Defendant established an implementation plan for electric source development business pursuant to Article 5(1) of the Electric Source Development Promotion Act and obtained approval from the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, and the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy publicly announced it pursuant to Article 5(5) of the same Act (Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy’s announcement, April 18

C. The Defendant consulted with the Plaintiff to acquire the instant land No. 1, but the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant should purchase the instant land No. 2, and the Defendant filed an application for adjudication because it did not reach an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

On December 6, 2018, the Central Land Tribunal rendered a decision (18 expropriation 0397) that “the Defendant shall expropriate the instant land for the instant project and compensate for losses at KRW 5,09,250” (18 expropriation 0397) and set the starting date of expropriation on January 30, 2019.

The Plaintiff reserved and received an objection to the amount of deposit equivalent to the above amount.

E. As of December 6, 2018, appraiser G assessed the value of the instant land No. 1 as of December 6, 2018, based on the entrustment of appraisal by this Court, KRW 57,545,700, and the value of the instant land No. 2, as of KRW 463,908,00, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 4, Eul's evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 4 (including numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of an appraisal commission to appraiser G of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The land No. 2 of this case also included in the subject of expropriation as the site for transmission towers.