The standards for calculating the amount of land expropriation compensation in the area where the standard land price is publicly announced;

If the land to be expropriated is within the area in which the standard land price is publicly announced by the Minister of Construction and Transportation pursuant to the provisions of Article 29 (1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, the amount of compensation for expropriation of the land shall be calculated on the basis of the standard land price publicly announced in the area concerned pursuant to Article 46 (2) of the Land Expropriation Act, and it shall not be permitted on the basis of the standard land price of the reference land located in the neighboring or similar area, notwithstanding the existence of the standard land

Article 29(1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, Article 46 of the Land Expropriation Act

Supreme Court Decision 86Nu846 Decided April 14, 1987

Attorney Kim Young-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

The Central Land Expropriation Committee

Defendant 1 and Defendant Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu828 delivered on August 28, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and the Intervenor joining the Defendant

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged that the land located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, ○○dong, and △△dong, including three parcels of the real estate owned by the plaintiff, was the area where the standard land price was publicly announced by the Minister of Construction and Transportation on December 12, 1979 pursuant to Article 29 (1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, and that the land category of 4,960 square meters among the real estate in this case is forest land, but the land category of 4,960 square meters is actual site and the remainder is about 56 square meters in the house site owned by the plaintiff and about 800 square meters in the surrounding area, and (number 2 omitted) 1,610 square meters in the above land category is used before the land category or 80,000 won in the vicinity of the above land site, which is the land lot number of 1,610,000 won in Seoul, which is similar to that of the above land (number 3 omitted).

If the land to be expropriated is within the area in which the standard land price is publicly announced by the Minister of Construction and Transportation in accordance with Article 29(1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, the calculation of compensation for expropriation of the land shall be based on the standard land price publicly announced in the area concerned in accordance with Article 46(2) of the Land Expropriation Act, and even if there is the standard land price for reference land to be applied in the neighboring or similar area, it shall not be permitted because it is contrary to the purpose of the selection of

As seen earlier, the court below did not consider whether the joint office of each land appraisal company, which was requested by the defendant to be evaluated by the defendant, has a reference land applicable to the real estate of this case in the relevant region and did not err by misapprehending the legal principles of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory and the Land Expropriation Act, such as the theory of lawsuit, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there was any error by misapprehending the legal principles of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory and the Land Expropriation Act, such as the theory of lawsuit.

In addition, in a case where the amount of land expropriation compensation decided by the defendant exceeds or is the same as the amount of compensation lawfully calculated, even if there were errors in the calculation method, it is not possible to seek cancellation of the adjudication on the ground that the calculation of compensation was unlawful. However, as long as the defendant did not assert the special circumstances like this at the court below, it is justifiable to revoke the defendant's adjudication on the ground that the method of calculating the amount of land expropriation compensation was unlawful. The arguments are groundless.

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.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)