logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.09 2017구합69992
보상금 증액 청구
Text

1. The Defendant: 94,235,50 won to Plaintiff A; 251,846,500 won to Plaintiff B; 164,875,830 won to Plaintiff C; and 52.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) A summary of the project: An urban development project (GG urban development project (j) (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”) - Project site: Hdong members in Seongbuk-gu: Defendant - Project implementer: Defendant - A public notice of Sungnam-si on May 30, 2014, the J public notice of Sungnam-si on June 15, 2015, the J public notice of Sungnam-si on September 17, 2015, the K public notice of Sungnam-si on November 8, 2016, and the public notice of Sungnam-si on June 19, 2017.

B. The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on September 25, 2017 - The date of expropriation: A public appraisal corporation for an appraisal corporation and a Pacific appraisal corporation for an appraisal corporation and a Pacific appraisal corporation for an appraisal corporation for an appraisal: A public appraisal corporation for an appraisal corporation and a Pacific appraisal corporation for an appraisal corporation for an appraisal in accordance with attached Table 1, as indicated in the “land subject to expropriation” in attached Table 1 located in the area of the instant project owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “each of the instant land,” and individual land is indicated only as “N land”) - The compensation amount is calculated as indicated in attached Table 1.

C. Results of the appraisal by the appraiserO (hereinafter “court appraiser”) - Court appraisal results: Attached Table 1 attached hereto - The amount calculated by multiplying the amount of compensation for each land of this case listed in the court appraiser’s written appraisal report by the share ratio of the relevant plaintiff(s).

the court appraiser's appraisal results of the court's appraisal results, the whole purport of the pleading, without any dispute as described in section A, Gap's evidence 1, 2, Eul's evidence 1 and 2,

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. In the appraisal of expropriation, the amount of compensation for the N-land and P-land in each of the instant lands is calculated by regarding them as separate land. However, the N-land and P land should be assessed at a single price by regarding them as a complex in light of their owner or use status, etc.

B. Of each of the instant lands, N&N land, Q land, and R land, where divided superficies were established, are passing through the airspace above the airspace and above the airspace, and there are structures such as steel towers above the airspace above the airspace.

arrow