1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant added the judgment similar to that of paragraph (2) to the assertion emphasized by the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable as it is

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant asserted that the moving expenses were not paid to the defendant, even though the moving expenses were paid to the tenant residing in the neighboring house.

The defendant receives relocation expenses from the plaintiff and wishes to move from the building of this case.

(B) The Defendant’s assertion to the effect that “The Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the moving expenses is related to the Defendant’s duty to deliver the instant building, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim until the moving expenses are paid.”

Judgment

The settlement money, director expenses, and relocation expenses, etc. recognized pursuant to Article 78 of the Public Works Act and Articles 54 and 55 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, etc., are the amount of money paid on the social security level for the owners of the buildings or their tenants who are incorporated into the zone where the public works are performed, and have the nature of the amount of money paid to the owners of the buildings or their tenants who suffer special difficulties due to the policy purpose of promoting the public works by encouraging early relocation and the relocation of their residence. Therefore, the right to claim compensation, such as relocation expenses, etc., for the owners of residential buildings who have been legally implemented for the public works, is the right under public law. Therefore, the lawsuit related to the compensation should be based on administrative litigation for legal relations under

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Da8129 Decided May 29, 2008). In light of the aforementioned purport, a project implementer’s obligation to pay resettlement funds, residential relocation expenses, and director expenses to residents of residential buildings is policy purpose and social security purpose to facilitate project implementation.