The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment by this court under paragraph (2) of this Article, and therefore, this is also accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff in this court's additional decision was based on the grounds of appeal that "the plaintiff was engaged in a private negotiation on the land owned by the plaintiff in this case and the land owned by the plaintiff in this case in accordance with the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor, and was unable to receive compensation for the above government affairs due to the defendant's reasons attributable to the defendant. Since then, the defendant recognized the omission of compensation in his own book and caused it to be received through a civil petition. The defendant responded to the public notice that he would be paid the above government affairs compensation in January 2016. In addition, the defendant did not set the consultation period in relation to the payment of the government affairs compensation in this case so that the plaintiff could not file an application for adjudication at source because it did not set the consultation period. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that "the defendant shall pay 2.1 million won compensation regardless of the plaintiff's application for the expropriation of the government affairs in this case."

The above assertion made by the plaintiff in this court does not differ from the contents of the plaintiff's assertion in the first instance court. Even when considering all the purport of the plaintiff's assertion, the plaintiff cannot claim compensation immediately without going through the adjudication procedure as to the administrative affairs of this case. Thus, the judgment of the first instance court which rejected the plaintiff's lawsuit is justified.

3. Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance which dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit as stated in the conclusion is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the costs of appeal shall be borne by the losing plaintiff.