수용보상금증액
1. All the claims of plaintiffs B and J expanded in the appeal and trial of plaintiffs B and J are dismissed.
2. The expansion from the trial.
1. Basic facts
(a) Project name: S access road construction work (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”);
2) Public notice of the project implementer: Defendant 3: Public notice of the modification of the road zone (T 4) on November 21, 201: U public notice of the modification of the Cheongnam-do on October 2, 2012
B. The date of commencement of expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on October 19, 2012 (hereinafter “instant adjudication on expropriation”): On December 2, 2012, the date of commencement of expropriation: The details of compensation are as indicated in the annexed list of “land subject to expropriation and obstacles”.
(hereinafter referred to as “land subject to expropriation and obstacles” . 3): An appraisal corporation: A new appraisal corporation in the future, a stock company, and a Japanese appraisal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “appraisal for expropriation”) in the attached Form No. 4: The result of the appraisal is referred to as “appraisal for expropriation”.
C. On September 5, 2014, the Plaintiff D died on September 5, 2014 while the lawsuit was pending, and Plaintiff AM succeeded to the instant lawsuit by solely succeeding the compensation for expropriation against the Defendant through the agreement on the division of inherited property.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 10, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 7, 8, 12 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment
A. The compensation for the land and obstacles subject to the expropriation of this case, which were determined by the plaintiffs' assertion in the adjudication on expropriation of this case, did not properly reflect the loss on the value decline, and the actual price is lower without reflecting the actual price due to the selection of reference land, calculation of individual factors, selection of compensation advance, and imbalance with the neighboring compensation price, etc. Therefore, the defendant did not deduct each of the compensation indicated in the separate sheet on the compensation statement in the separate sheet on the plaintiffs' assertion, which is the legitimate compensation statement, from each money stated in the separate sheet on the compensation statement in the separate sheet on the compensation statement.