손실보상금
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: “Effective date” of the first instance judgment No. 9 of the first instance judgment shall be deemed as “the day following the effective date”; “No. 8 of the second class “2” shall be deemed as “3”; “from March 29, 2013,” “from March 30, 2013, the second class “from March 30, 2013,” and “No. 7, 2013, Sept. 8, 2013, which is the date following the effective date”; “No. 12” shall be deemed as “the date following the effective date, September 8, 2013,” and it shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the following addition of the reasons for the judgment.
2. The following shall be added to the portion added to the judgment of the first instance, 12th and 7th.
【Defendant asserts that the period from the 60th day after the date of invalidation of the adjudication of expropriation to the date of filing an application for adjudication of expropriation again shall be included in the above 60-day period. However, as seen earlier, if a project operator fails to pay or deposit the compensation adjudicated by the competent Land Tribunal until the date of commencement of expropriation, the application for adjudication of expropriation and the adjudication of expropriation becomes invalid, while the application for adjudication of expropriation made by landowners, etc. shall remain effective. Therefore, even if the adjudication of expropriation becomes void due to unpaid compensation, the period for delay in the application for adjudication of expropriation by the project operator shall be calculated as of the date of filing an application for adjudication of expropriation in accordance with the language and text of Article 30(2) of the Land Compensation Act, and there is no legal basis to exclude the 60-day period from the date following the date of invalidation of the adjudication of expropriation from the date of application for adjudication of expropriation
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.