beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Recognition and Public Notice of Project - Construction Project Name B (hereinafter “instant Project”): Public Notice: C announced by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on January 7, 2016 - Project implementer: Defendant
B. Of each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “O land of this case”) as listed in the project zone and the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) the land of this case is the land for which D was under circumstances. The land of this case was the land of 2 and 3 (the original land before the project of this case).
(2) According to the above notice dated January 7, 2016, the Defendant included the land listed in [Attachment 1 and 3] among the above land in the instant project zone, and the land listed in [Attachment 2] in [Attachment 2] remaining as the remaining land.
C. On June 23, 2016, the Defendant filed a request for consultation on compensation for losses with the Plaintiff by deeming that the Plaintiff was the right holder of the following goods, such as three-year sublim trees 129 weeks on the instant land incorporated into the instant project. The Defendant filed an application for consultation with the Central Land Expropriation Committee on March 27, 2017, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant, on the one hand, for consultation on the kinds, structure, and quantity assessment (average) of the location parcel number in the 129-year unit price for three-year sublimlime trees in the Sung-gun of the Sung-gun of the Sung-gun of the 12-year Sung-gun of the 15-year Sung-gun of the 12-year sublimlim tree trees in the 12-year Sung-gun of the Sungsung-gun of the 15-year Sungsung-gun of the 129-year evaluation on the inclusion of fruit trees in the instant land:
3) On October 19, 2017, the Central Land Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling on the amount of compensation for losses for the said goods at KRW 7,797,000. D. The Plaintiff did not claim compensation for losses for each of the instant land before filing the instant lawsuit, in addition to the compensation for losses for each of the instant goods.
2. Meanwhile, around May 2017, the Plaintiff leased and cultivated from H to the Defendant.