logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.6.24.선고 2013다205389 판결
손실보상금
Cases

2013Da205389 Compensation for losses

Plaintiff, Appellant

Silve Co., Ltd.

Defendant, Appellee

Korea

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Na36335 Decided May 2, 2013

Imposition of Judgment

June 24, 2015

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below judged that the defendant's taking of the measure of this case as stated in the judgment of the court below in response to the astronomical situation was difficult to view it as an unlawful act against public official's official duty. In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there was no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the illegality under Article 2 (1) of the

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3

According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court determined that, although the Plaintiff was unable to use and make profits from the instant land use right after the instant measure, it cannot be deemed as a special sacrifice due to public necessity, even if it was a special sacrifice, the right to claim direct compensation pursuant to Article 23(3) of the Constitution is not created, and the right to claim compensation cannot be acknowledged on the ground that Article 26(3)10 of the Inter-Korean Exchange and Cooperation Act and Article 41(3)8 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act apply mutatis mutandis to the compensation provisions of the Plant Protection Act applied mutatis mutandis.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error by misapprehending the legal principles on the compensation for losses and special sacrifice under Article 23 (3) of the Constitution.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jae-young

Justices Kim Shin-chul

Justices Min Il-young

Justices Park Young-young

Justices Kim Jong-il

arrow