The judgment below

Part of the judgment against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the amount stated in the attached Form shall be reversed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s “land compensation-related work” entrusted by the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs in relation to the implementation of an “O Highway Private Investment Project” by the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on March 28, 2008 includes not only the compensation work on the incorporated land itself, but also the compensation work on the remaining land price reduction under Article 73 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant statutes and legal principles, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the person liable to compensate for losses incurred by public works.

Therefore, this part of the ground of appeal is without merit.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

(a) The Land Compensation Act provides that a project operator is obligated to compensate for land incorporated into the project operator, to compensate for obstacles, to compensate for losses incurred in business or agriculture, and to compensate for the remaining land, it cannot be deemed that the other party directly incurs specific rights entitled to compensation from the project operator only by virtue of the provision itself;

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da14391, 94Da14407 delivered on June 30, 1995). In a case where an agreement is not reached between a project implementer and a person who suffered losses on each of the compensation for losses, the period during which the obligation to pay specific compensation for losses, which became subject to adjudication on the commencement date of expropriation, has arrived immediately after the occurrence of specific liability to pay compensation for losses, which

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Nu308, Dec. 24, 1991). On the other hand, after acceptance, specific liability for the payment of compensation for losses occurs when specific losses have been realized, and the period during which the project implementer becomes able to recognize losses upon the request for performance by the person who suffered losses.

Therefore, the obligation to pay compensation for the remaining land upon the request after expropriation is incurred.