The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The summary of the case and the facts premised on the case

A. The summary of the instant case pertains to the case where the Seoul Regional Land Tribunal sought an increase in the amount of compensation for losses based on Article 37(3) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) and Article 85 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”), on the grounds that the amount of compensation for losses arising from the expropriation ruling is unreasonably low with respect to the expropriation ruling rendered on April 26, 2013 by the Plaintiff and the joint Plaintiff A on the land, etc. owned by the Plaintiff

The first instance judgment accepted the entire claim of A and part of the plaintiff's claim, dismissed the remainder of the claim, and only the plaintiff appealed against the lost part.

(A) The part of the first instance judgment against A was separated and finalized as it is).

B. On the premise of the premise 【Evidence 1, A2, A3-3, A4-2, and B-3, and the purport of the entire pleadings (i.e., the land owned by the Plaintiff as a whole by the Defendant’s redevelopment improvement project implemented by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is a housing redevelopment improvement project partnership that obtained authorization from the head of Seongbuk-gu Office for the improvement project of housing redevelopment.

⑵ 원고 소유 토지의 수용과정 ㈎ C 주택재개발 정비사업은 도시정비법 28조에 따라 사업시행인가(2010. 5. 17. 서울특별시 성북구 고시 D, 2012. 11. 29. 서울시 성북구 고시 F)로 인하여 토지보상법상 사업인정과 고시가 있는 것으로 의제되었다.

㈏ 피고는 주택재개발 정비사업에 편입된 원고 소유의 서울 성북구 G 대 105㎡에 대하여 원고와 보상협의를 하였으나 협의가 성립되지 않아 서울지방토지수용위원회의 수용재결을 신청하였다.

㈐ 서울지방토지수용위원회는 2013. 4. 26. 원고 소유의 토지에 대하여 보상금 678,457,500원, 수용개시일 2013. 6. 14.로 하는 수용재결을...