Whether a landowner may immediately file a claim against a project operator for compensation for losses due to a decrease in the price of the remaining land under Article 73 of the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects without going through the adjudication procedure prescribed in Articles 34 and 50 of the same Act (negative)

Articles 34, 50, and 73 of the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (amended by Act No. 8665 of Oct. 17, 2007)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Taecheon General Law Office, Attorneys Kim Yong-ju, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Korea Water Resources Corporation (Law Firm Cheong Law, Attorneys Lee Han-mun, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Busan High Court Decision 2005Nu4502 decided Nov. 3, 2006

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 73 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (amended by Act No. 8665 of Oct. 17, 2007; hereinafter “Public Works Act”) provides that “If the price of the remaining land is reduced or other losses are incurred due to the acquisition or use of part of a group of land belonging to the same landowner, or if it is necessary to construct a passage, ditch, fence, etc. or to construct other construction works on the remaining land, the project operator shall compensate for such losses or construction expenses under the conditions as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation.” In full view of the contents and legislative purport of Articles 34, 50, 61, 73, and 83 through 85 of the Public Works Act, in order for a landowner to receive compensation from the project operator for losses due to a decrease in the price of the remaining land pursuant to Article 73 of the Public Works Act, it is reasonable to deem the landowner to be entitled to compensation for damages without undergoing the procedure of adjudication pursuant to Articles 34 and 53 of the Act.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is justifiable.

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the form of a lawsuit claiming compensation for losses due to a decrease in the price of remaining land by a landowner as provided in Article 73 of the Public Works Act.

2. 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 Cha Han-sung (Presiding Justice)