The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Article 65 of the Urban Planning Act provides that, in case where there exists any person who has been remarkably benefited from the urban planning project which is implemented by him, the executor of the urban planning project may, under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, bear part of the expenses required for such urban planning project within the scope of his benefit, and Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the beneficiary’s charge under Article 65 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be borne within the limit of 1/2 of the expenses required for such urban planning project only in case where the price of the land exceeds twice the amount calculated by adding up the natural inflation

In addition, according to the records, Article 6 (2) of the Ordinance on Beneficiary's Charges for Urban Planning Projects at Jeonju, in order to curb the enormous effort and expenditure of expenses when assessing the price of each individual parcel of land subject to the imposition of expenses for the entire land subject to the imposition of the expenses of the beneficiary, shall be prescribed to investigate several parcels of land designated by the mayor and calculate the price of each grade as the average value of each grade as the average value by each grade area for the assessment method of the price assessment. However, in full view of these provisions, the judgment of the court below is justified in holding that the land of this case falls under class 1 of Section 1 of the Urban Planning Project at the time of Jeonju, and the land of this case falls under class 2,720,000 per square day before the construction of the said urban planning project, and the natural increase in the land price does not exceed two times the aggregate of the natural increase in the price before its implementation (1,019,00 + 1,000 + 1,000 x 201) x 2038.

2. In the interpretation of Article 6 of the Ordinance on the Charges of the Beneficiary of Urban Planning in the previous week, the average value of each land by region shall be based on the average value of each land by grade through the major area of the planning project. However, in the case where a construction section is separately stipulated as long as specific land is imposed in the case where significant benefits exist due to the urban planning project, the provisions of the above Ordinance are not based on the average value by grade area within the major area, but on the basis of the average value by grade within the construction section, it is reasonable that the above provision of the above Ordinance is not based on the average value by grade area within the major

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)