(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.15 2015구합65064

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.15 2015구합65064

손실보상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project name and project name: An industrial complex development project (23th of the development project (23th of the Silsan City; hereinafter referred to as the "project of this case"): Defendant;

B. Owners of obstacles, etc. subject to expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on January 23, 2014: The commencement date of expropriation shall be the date of dismissal of obstacles, etc. in the list Nos. 1 through 6, 76 through 80, 82, and 83 of the list Nos. 51,47,840 of the list Nos. 7 through 26 of the list Nos. 408,96,00 of the list Nos. 27 through 75 of the list Nos. 14,20,000 of the list Nos. 81 of the list Nos. 81, 115,000 of the list No. 84, 84, or 100 of the list No. 84, Jan. 23, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “instant facilities”):

Order of an objection filed by the Central Land Tribunal on April 23, 2015: The facts that there is no dispute over the dismissal of the plaintiff's objection (based on recognition), Gap's statements, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8-1, 8-2, and 2's images, and the purport of all pleadings.

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff obtained permission for the installation of the instant facilities on condition that the Defendant waives the right to claim compensation for damages for the instant facilities from the Sungsung market. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation for damages for this case’s facilities violates the principle of good faith. (2) The Plaintiff’s claim for compensation for damages for this case’s facilities is contrary to the principle of trust and good faith, which was established before the specific items, such as the goods to be expropriated, are designated and publicly announced ( September 12, 2008) and thus becomes subject to compensation. Even if the Plaintiff obtained permission for the installation of the instant facilities on condition that the Plaintiff waives the right to claim compensation for damages for the instant facilities, the Plaintiff’s consent is not only and the right to claim compensation for damages cannot be waived as public rights.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2017.10.24 2016구합70193

-수원지방법원 2016.01.20 2014구합58014

-수원지방법원 2018.10.31 2018구합60336

-서울고등법원 2016.08.25 2015누56375

-수원지방법원 2015.08.13 2014구합3861