The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. According to Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory (amended by Act No. 3914, Dec. 31, 1986) which was enforced on August 17, 1984 at the time of the original adjudication, where the reference land price under the provisions of paragraph (1) of the same Article is expropriated in the area where the reference land price is publicly announced, the reference land price shall be the compensation price, but the compensation price shall be the proportion of the nearby land unrelated to the relevant land, wholesale price increase rate, and other matters shall be considered. Meanwhile, according to paragraphs (1) through (3) of the same Article, the reference land price shall be publicly announced by the Minister of Construction and Transportation in advance, and if the reference land price is to be publicly announced, the target land area shall be publicly announced (paragraph (2)); if the reference land price is to be determined by the standard land category, the reference land price shall be determined by the Presidential Decree No. 1 to be divided into three different categories; if the reference land price is to be determined by the reference land category No. 181 of the present land area.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below assessed the amount of compensation on the basis of the following reasons: (a) the land in this case was publicly announced as the area where the standard land price was publicly announced as the area subject to public notice of March 22, 1983 by the public notice of Construction Part 24; (b) the land price was the land in the area where the standard land price was publicly announced under July 26, 253 of the same year; and (c) the defendant had two joint offices of land appraisal companies assess the amount of compensation based on the standard land price of this case; (b) one of them selected the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government ( Address 1 omitted); and (c) one of them selected as the standard land price, and assessed the amount of compensation on the basis of the former ( Address 2 omitted); (d) the public notice of construction as the standard land price was not listed as the standard land price; and (e) the judgment of the court below on the ground that there was no unlawful determination of the compensation amount of the land in this case or its determination of the standard land price was unlawful.

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

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)