beta
Text
1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal and selective claims in the trial are all dismissed.
2. Appeal;
Reasons
1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act
Part 4 6 through 9 : (2) Plaintiffs, Appointors, and other designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.”) excluding P
The division and T and U are the owners of land, etc. who owned real estate or obstacles within the rearrangement zone in this case, and the plaintiff, etc. and T and U did not file an application for parcelling-out in opposition to the establishment of the non-party partnership.
Meanwhile, in accordance with the agreement on the division of inherited property between the Plaintiff, etc. and the non-party partnership filed by the Daejeon Metropolitan City Land Tribunal and the non-party partnership in accordance with the following related cases, the Selected P is a person who has become a sole heir in the inheritance commenced on October 14, 2013 by India upon the death of the deceased on September 1, 2013. P is a person who becomes a sole heir in the inheritance commenced on October 14, 2013.
The term “Plaintiff, etc.” in Chapter 4, Chapter 13, and Chapter 19, respectively, shall be read as “Plaintiff, etc., T, and U.”. The term “inward association” in Chapter 5, as “S. Land Tribunal of Daejeon Metropolitan City and Non-Party Association”.
The Daejeon District Court partially accepted the claim against the plaintiff et al. and T and U on November 5, 2014 (However, the claim for compensation under Article 42 of the Land Compensation Act was dismissed in entirety).
(1) The court rendered a ruling that the non-party union filed an appeal (such as the plaintiff, T, and U.S.) by 2014Nu654, and the court rendered a ruling that partially accepted the appeal of the non-party union and the incidental appeal of the plaintiff, T, and U on December 24, 2015, and the non-party union, the plaintiff, T, and U were Supreme Court Decision 2016Du247, respectively.