재결처분취소
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
(a) Project approval and public notice - Project approval and improvement project for B cultural heritage protection zones (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Project implementer: Suwon City - Designation and public notice of cultural heritage protection zones: Public notice C on July 10, 2013;
B. The ruling of expropriation - The ruling of expropriation by the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal on March 28, 2016 (hereinafter “instant expropriation”) - The objects of expropriation: Suwon-gu D-27 square meters owned by the Plaintiff within the protection zone for cultural heritage (hereinafter “instant land”) and the first floor of stud/ment block, earth walls, etc. (hereinafter “instant obstacles”).
C. This ruling - The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on objection on August 25, 2016 (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) - The compensation for the instant land shall be increased to KRW 17,398,120, but the compensation for the obstacles shall not be increased to KRW 17,398,120, [based grounds for recognition], the facts that there is no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 2, 3, and Eul’s each entry in the evidence No. 1, and the purport
2. Determination
A. The head of a local government may expropriate land, buildings and other structures within the cultural heritage protection zone pursuant to the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”). In such cases, a landowner may institute an administrative litigation within 60 days from the date of receiving a written adjudication if he/she is dissatisfied with such adjudication, and within 30 days from the date of receiving a written adjudication if he/she has filed an objection, if he/she has filed an objection, respectively.
(Article 85(1)1 of the Land Compensation Act provides that the Plaintiff may be deemed to have received the service of the instant written objection on September 29, 2016, and the fact that the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant judgment on January 17, 2017, after the lapse of 30 days from the Plaintiff, is apparent in the record.
Therefore, the instant lawsuit is filed after the lapse of the filing period.