[토지수용재결처분취소][공1989.2.15.(842),248]
(a) In case of expropriation of land in an area where the standard land prices are publicly announced, the standard land price for calculating the amount of compensation for loss;
(b) Determination of the reference land for land to be expropriated;
(c) Criteria for calculating the amount of land expropriation compensation in an area where the standard land prices are publicly announced;
(d) The time when the amount of land expropriation compensation is calculated;
(a) In full view of the provisions of Article 29(1), Article 29(2), Article 3(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, and Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where the standard land is publicly notified, it is not appropriate to calculate compensation for losses on the basis of the standard land price for each category of land to be expropriated if the land category is a pre-determined, paddy, site, forest, or miscellaneous land.
(b) As the reference land for the land to be expropriated, only one reference land, the category and grade of which are the same, among the reference land determined in advance by land category within the relevant area;
(c)In calculating the amount of expropriation compensation for the land within the area where the standard price is publicly notified, the standard price shall be based on the standard price, but all price calculation factors, such as the normal price of similar similar land, specified in Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, shall be determined by considering the specific and comprehensive factors.
(d) If public project operators expropriate land or a building on its ground, etc., the amount of losses to be compensated to their owners shall be calculated on the basis of prices at the time of expropriation or adjudication;
Articles 29(1), 29(2), 29(3), and 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, Article 46 of the Land Expropriation Act
A. Supreme Court Decision 86Nu846 delivered on April 14, 1987, 87Nu845 delivered on July 7, 1987, and 87Nu977 delivered on September 13, 1988, and 87Nu945 delivered on December 27, 198, 86Nu334 delivered on May 12, 198. Supreme Court Decision 87Nu128 delivered on December 8, 1987
Masung and Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant and two others
Attorney Park Chang-chul, Counsel for the Central Land Tribunal
Attorney Kim Chang-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu1158 delivered on July 1, 1988
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
As to the Grounds of Appeal:
1. In full view of the provisions of Article 29(1), Article 29(2), 2, 3, and (5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, and Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where the standard land price is publicly announced, compensation for losses should be calculated on the basis of the standard land price for each category of land, land category, site, forest land, and miscellaneous land. It is not appropriate that the compensation for losses should be calculated on the basis of the standard land price for land which is not the standard land price, or for reference land in neighboring or similar areas (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 86Nu846, Apr. 14, 1987; 87Nu45, Jul. 7, 1988; 87Nu977, Sept. 13, 1988; 208Nu9787, Apr. 28, 1987).
The judgment of the court below, after compiling relevant evidence, cannot be deemed as a legitimate evaluation in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, and the defendant's disposition of this case with the content of compensation determined based on the above shall be justified, since the normal market price of neighboring similar land is not examined in the evaluation process, or there is no knowledge of how the normal market price of neighboring land is considered, and the rate of land fluctuation, regional factors, and individual factors are considered. The joint office of Hansung Land Appraisal Co., Ltd. (No. 12-2) duly confirmed the facts that two or more reference land are selected or the answer is selected as reference land as reference land for miscellaneous land, etc., and the above two appraisal and assessment cannot be deemed as a legitimate evaluation in accordance with the above mentioned opinion, and therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case with the contents of compensation determined based on the above evaluation process is unlawful. There is no error of law such as misapprehension of legal principles or incomplete deliberation, etc.
2. The amount of losses to be compensated to the owner due to the public project operator's expropriation of land or a building on its ground shall be calculated on the basis of the price at the time of the adjudication of expropriation. As in this case, the appraisal of a building price was made at the time earlier than the time of the adjudication of expropriation, and thus, it cannot be concluded that the owner was more favorable than the time of the adjudication of expropriation. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that the owner was more favorable. In addition, since the appraisal price at the advanced company and the joint office of land appraisal company, which is the basis of calculating the amount of compensation for the goods and business losses among the subject matter of this case, is not determined separately and specifically, the part of the judgment of the court below that the disposition of this case contains the amount of compensation determined on the basis of this case is unlawful, such as the theory of lawsuit, and there is no error of law such as incomplete deliberation, and lack
3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)