logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2019.07.25 2018구단69489
수용보상금 증액청구의 소
Text

1. The defendant shall state to the plaintiffs the separate list "the difference between the court's appraisal amount and the compensation for objection".

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: Project approval and public announcement - Project operator: Defendant - Public announcement of project approval: Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on September 15, 201;

B. Adjudication on expropriation by the local Land Tribunal of August 25, 2017 - The object of expropriation is described in the item of “subject matter of expropriation” in the attached Table.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court’s appraisal and appraisal and appraisal conducted on the part of the Plaintiffs on the part of the Plaintiff, and on the part of the Plaintiff, the court’s appraisal and appraisal conducted on the part of the Plaintiff, the obstacles were already destroyed and excluded from the assessment. In light of the above legal principles, the court’s appraisal and assessment conducted on the part of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiffs withdrawn the claim for increase in compensation for the obstacles while changing the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim as of January 16, 2019. Thus, the court’s appraisal and assessment conducted on the part of the Plaintiffs on the part of the Plaintiff.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs asserted that the additional charges for delay under Article 30 (3) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor should be increased according to the increased compensation in accordance with the purport of the claim as of January 16, 2019 and the application for the change of the cause of the claim.

However, the additional charges under the above provision are paid in addition to the "compensation adjudicated by the competent Land Tribunal", and cannot be deemed to have been paid in addition to the increased amount of compensation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2018Du58790, Jan. 17, 2019; 2018Du67022, Mar. 28, 2019; 2019Du38533, Jul. 11, 2019; hereinafter the purport of each of the above provision is to increase the additional charges through the application for the change of the purport of the claim and the grounds for the claim as of May 23, 2019).

arrow