1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court below's acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the additional judgment of the court of first instance under Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence

2. Additional determination of the trial;

A. Whether the extinctive prescription under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act has expired (illegal) 1) the Defendant’s right to repurchase claims against the Defendant. Since the Defendant’s right to repurchase claims against each of the instant non-use lands has expired after the lapse of 10 years from August 2013, 2013, the limitation period has elapsed since the Defendant acquired each of the instant non-use lands, the right to claim damages against the Defendant occurred at that time, and the Plaintiffs were aware that they have acquired their right to claim damages immediately. The Plaintiffs’ right to claim damages extinguished around August 2016, which was 3 years after the extinctive prescription under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act, starting from that time, around August 2016. The legal principle of Article 2(1) of the State Compensation Act applies Article 8 of the State Compensation Act to the State compensation claim under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act, the State Compensation Act’s right to claim damages expires unless the victim or his legal representative exercises it for 3 years from that day, and the offender’s objective and specific circumstances of tort.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da33754, Apr. 13, 2012). Article 91(1) of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) provides that “The date of acquisition of land through consultation or acquisition thereof.”