beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.09.21 2017구합70151

관리처분계획 일부취소

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association that implements a housing redevelopment improvement project in the Bupyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City area of 66,062 square meters (hereinafter “instant project area”), and the Plaintiff is the owners of the land, etc. in the instant project area.

B. The Defendant prepared a management and disposition plan (hereinafter “instant management and disposition plan”) which includes the appraised value of land and buildings owned by the Plaintiffs, which is calculated through an appraisal (hereinafter “instant appraisal and disposition plan”) and an appraisal and appraisal corporation of Sam Chang Chang Corporation and Alban Corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal and assessment”) and obtained authorization from the head of Bupyeong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City on May 1, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The prices of the previous land and buildings owned by the Plaintiffs under the instant management and disposition plan are unfairly low for the following reasons, and thus significantly violates the equity between the Plaintiffs and other members of the Defendant.

Therefore, the part regarding the plaintiffs in the management and disposal plan of this case should be revoked as it is unlawful.

1) The appraisal of this case calculated the “other factors” by referring only to five transaction cases. The five transaction cases alone cannot be deemed representative in appraising the prices of all the land within the instant project area. As such, fairness and appropriateness of the appraisal results of this case are not guaranteed. 2) The appraisal results of this case are likely to be calculated without any criteria since each of the “individual factors” were not clearly indicated in the calculation process of each of the “individual factors” applied to each transaction cases. Thus, fairness and appropriateness of the appraisal results of this case are not guaranteed.

3 In calculating the “other factors”, the appraisal of this case aims to calculate the land price fluctuation rate of the reference land.