beta
Text
The defendant's KRW 183,96,600 to the plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from December 14, 2018 to June 4, 2020.
Reasons
1. Details of ruling;
(a) Contents 1 of an urban planning facility project: A public notice of approval for the implementation of the project (hereinafter referred to as the “project in this case”) 2: The operator of the project in Suwon-si public notice of October 17, 2017: the Defendant;
B. On October 29, 2018 of the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant expropriation adjudication”): A person subject to expropriation on October 29, 2018 of the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant expropriation adjudication”): 1,839,660,000 won (the amount of each land shall be the following amount:
subsection 2(b)(3)(3)(5)(3)(4)(5)(2)(3)(4)
C. The central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) on August 22, 2019: K in the case of the appraisal corporation: 1,870,893,400 won (the amount by land) for the compensation for losses: 1,870,893,400 won (the amount by land shall be as follows / [the table] / GF H
D. As a result of the appraisal by the court appraiser M (hereinafter “court appraisal”), the Plaintiff filed an application for the appraisal of each of the instant lands on the basis of the date of the instant adjudication on expropriation. Accordingly, in the appraisal conducted accordingly, the appraiser M divided the appraised value of each of the instant lands owned by the Plaintiff into “natural green area” and “production green area” (hereinafter “the result of the court appraisal”); GF HED / without dispute; GF H / without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply); Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4; Eul evidence each; the results of the appraisal entrusted to the appraiser M; and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The land of this case is changed from around 2003 to "natural green belt" according to "waste disposal facility business (food waste disposal facility)" which is entirely irrelevant to the project of this case. The use area is changed from "production green belt" to "natural green belt," and the existing waste disposal facility business.