logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.09 2014구합57738
수용보상금청구의 소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval, announcement, etc. - Business name: Industrial complex development project (C industrial complex development project (10j) - Project operator: Defendant - Public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on September 30, 2009;

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on May 22, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant ruling of expropriation”): (a) mountain ginseng planted by the Plaintiff on the E cultivation area 3,583 square meters in Jeonnam-do, the F cultivation area 1,087 square meters in Gwangju mine area; (b) mountain ginseng planted by the Plaintiff B on the G cultivation area 3,250 square meters in Gwangju Mine-gu; (c) H cultivation area 495 square meters in H farming area; (d) 113 square meters in I farming area; (e) mountain ginseng planted on the J farming area 810 square meters in each of the instant lands (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”; and (e) mountain ginseng planted on each of the instant lands; (e) compensation for the Plaintiff 1,243,540 won in total; and (e) compensation for the Plaintiff 1,000 won in total; (e) compensation for the Plaintiff 2,031 square meters in total; and (e) compensation for the Plaintiff 4, 130130 days in future appraisal corporation.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. From 2006 to 2009, the plaintiffs asserted that they cultivated the mountain ginseng of this case at the time of the ruling of expropriation after planting the mountain ginseng of this case on each of the land of this case. The compensation determined by the ruling of expropriation of this case is excessively low compared to the actual value of the mountain ginseng of this case. Thus, the defendant should pay reasonable compensation to the plaintiffs according to the court appraisal.

[Plaintiff did not clearly state the basis for calculation of the amount of claim in an application for modification of purport of claim or a preparatory document. However, in light of the amount of claim and the details of appraisal in the application for appraisal, etc., the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects

Pursuant to Paragraph 1(2) of Article 41, ‘The present value of the total revenues' shall be the expenses to be administered in the future.

arrow