손해배상(기)
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The following facts are acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers) without dispute between the parties:
A. On December 31, 2009, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (hereinafter “the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs”) established and publicly announced a master plan for the construction project of high-speed railroads in Seoul Metropolitan Area (Public Notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs) and approved and publicly announced the implementation plan for the construction project of high-speed railroads in Seoul Metropolitan Area (C) on May 27, 2011 (hereinafter “instant project”).
(Public Notice E, hereinafter “instant Disposition”) of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs
The Plaintiffs owned each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land”). Based on the instant disposition, the Plaintiffs owned each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 3 on September 30, 201 with respect to each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2 and the land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 4 owned by the Plaintiff A on the ground of acquiring consultation on public land on September 30, 201, for which the instant disposition was based, the ownership was transferred to the Korea Rail Network Authority on May 30, 2012.
C. However, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, while rendering the instant disposition, indicated that the topographical map is publicly announced by means of inspecting the land information system in accordance with Article 8 of the Framework Act on the Regulation of Land Use and Article 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, but the Defendant Intervenor published the topographical map related to the instant project on March 19, 2012, which was about 10 months after the instant disposition, on March 19, 2012.
Based on the above procedural defect, etc., the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition on August 23, 201, and the Seoul Administrative Court dismissed the Plaintiffs’ claim on November 30, 2012 under the 2011Guhap27537, stating that the instant disposition is unlawful.