잔여지가치하락 손실보상금
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 9,687,100 and its interest on June 26, 2007.
1. Fact that there is no dispute over basic facts (based on recognition), Gap 4-1, 2, 3, A6-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings;
(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: B road confirmation and packaging construction ( local highway C) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”): Public notice: D public notice of Gyeonggi-do on July 1, 2010, and Gyeonggi-do public notice E on July 15, 2013 - Project implementer E: Defendant
B. Part of the land owned by the Plaintiff - G, H, and I land owned by the Plaintiff is divided into the instant project, and only part of the land was incorporated into the instant project and the ownership transfer registration was completed to the Defendant on June 25, 2007.
(2) The following facts are as follows: “The land incorporated into the instant land” and the remaining land after incorporation is collectively referred to as “the instant remaining land,” and it is specified as the parcel number when referring to the individual land. The land incorporated into the instant land after division before subdivision, which is 307 square meters of land incorporated into the 39 square meters of G 394 square meters of land (consultation acquisition) before G 394 square meters of land incorporated into the 39 square meters of G 394 square meters of land incorporated into the 329 square meters of land (consultation acquisition) at the H site of 565 square meters of land incorporated into the 293 square meters of land (consultation acquisition) was combined
Land to be incorporated (consultation acquisition) 173m20,000
C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on April 17, 2014 (hereinafter “adjudication of expropriation”) - Dismissal of the Plaintiff’s claim for decline in the value of the remaining land of this case - An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation in the same day and an appraisal corporation in the same day.
D. On June 28, 2011, the Plaintiff sold the remaining land to M, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in M’s name on November 21, 2012.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) As the value of the remaining land of this case, which constituted the land incorporated and a group of land as a result of the Plaintiff’s assertion, has decreased, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the amount equivalent to the value that has fallen.
(2) The defendant's assertion (A) that the plaintiff sold the remaining land of this case and lost its ownership, so there is no right to claim compensation for losses arising from the decline in the value of the remaining land.