손실보상금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 320,595,340 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from July 17, 2013 to May 7, 2015, and the following.
1. Land subject to expropriation on May 23, 2013 on the date of adjudication by the Central Land Expropriation and Adjudication Committee by the owners of land, etc., including the project operator, who implements the housing site development project, on May 23, 2013: The same shall apply to the list of land in the attached Form;
Business facilities to be transferred: The same shall apply to the list of business facilities, etc.
Amount of compensation for land expropriation - Amount of compensation for suspension of work: 6,534,785,600 won - Amount of compensation for suspension of work: 10,896,330 business expenses, such as business facilities, etc. 110,896, 330 business income (three months), 149,352,330 business income: The fact that no ground for dispute over recognition exists on July 16, 2013, entry of evidence No. 1
2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion seeks the increase in the cost of relocation and suspension of business of each business facility, etc. indicated in the list of the annexed land, such as compensation for expropriation of each land, attached business facilities, etc. indicated in the list of annexed land, and sought payment of the remainder obtained by deducting the amount of compensation recognized at the time of the adjudication of expropriation from the above amount, by asserting that the reasonable amount of compensation is the amount of appraisal by the court appraiser (in particular, the amount
B. 1) Determination 1) Where multiple parcels of land in legal principles C and D are indivisiblely related to each other by carrying out a group of land in use, barring any special circumstance, it is reasonable to regard the whole parcels of land as one parcel and evaluate the whole at a single price for the land. "Where an indivisible relationship is for use" refers to a case where the situation in which a group of land is used as a group of land is deemed reasonable and reasonable in terms of social, economic, and administrative aspect from a reasonable point of view of value formation of the land in question.
(See Supreme Court Decisions 9Du8824 delivered on July 27, 2001, 2005Du1428 delivered on May 26, 2005, etc.). In this case, evidence Nos. 2-2 and 21-2 in this case