[2] The case holding that the amount of compensation for losses should be calculated on the basis of the date of the public announcement of project approval, not on the date of the expropriation decision, in case where the land phenomenon and specific-use area were changed to the public project in question at the time of the expropriation decision, since the public project operator's land was discovered during the construction without any procedure of expropriation or compensation, since the land was expropriated

[2] The case holding that the amount of compensation for losses should be calculated on the basis of the date of the public announcement of project approval, not on the date of the expropriation decision, in case where the land phenomenon and specific-use area were changed to the public project in question at the time of the expropriation decision, since the public project operator's decision that the land did not fall during the construction without the expropriation procedure or compensation became final and conclusive,

In calculating the amount of compensation for losses caused by the expropriation of land, the reasonable price shall be determined on the basis of the price at the time of the adjudication of expropriation without considering the changes in price arising from the implementation of a plan directly aimed at the implementation of the relevant public project, and the development gains arising from the implementation of another project unrelated to the relevant public project shall be assessed at the price not excluded (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Nu7386, Mar. 3, 1995; 94Nu13725, Nov. 7, 1995).

In accordance with the facts duly established by the court below, the defendant Korea Land Corporation (hereinafter "the defendant Corporation") approved the implementation plan for the industrial base development project for the industrial complex development project on May 16, 1990, and implemented the project, the land of this case was removed by village, and the construction without the procedure of expropriation or compensation. Accordingly, when the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant Corporation for confirmation of ownership of the land of this case against the defendant corporation and completed the construction work, the plaintiff's winning decision became final on November 24, 1995, the land of this case was first accepted on July 15, 1996 by the Central Land Tribunal, and 1/4 of tideland and 3/4 of the land of this case, which were left abandoned at the time of the execution decision of the project of this case, the land of this case was altered to the land structure and changed to the specific use area of the land of this case, and the compensation for development profit of the land of this case was excluded from the execution of the project of this case.

However, for reasons indicated in its holding, the court below determined that the calculation of the compensation amount for the land of this case should be based on the current status as of the date of the ruling of expropriation, and there is an error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles regarding the above legal principles, the method of calculating the compensation amount for expropriation

The argument in the grounds of appeal pointed out this point is justified.

On the other hand, Supreme Court Decision 92Nu4833 Decided November 10, 1992 cited by the court below is merely a different issue, and its purport does not seem to be contrary to the reasoning of the case.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)