Text
1. The part concerning the late application for adjudication on expropriation of the judgment of the court of first instance, additional dues, and the claim for the delayed damages;
Reasons
1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the delayed payment of damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of delivery of a copy of the application for change to the purport of the Plaintiff’s claim on April 13, 2018 to the date of complete payment, including ① KRW 324,002,150, which is the difference between the “compensation according to the result of the appraisal by the court of first instance” and the “compensation recognized in the adjudication of expropriation,” ② Additional dues on the application for adjudication of expropriation under Article 30(3) of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works for the said “Compensation” (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) for the delayed payment of damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of delivery of a copy of the application for change to the purport of the claim to the Plaintiff’s ownership to the date of complete payment. The first instance court rejected part of the aforementioned claim and the aforementioned delay.
With respect to this, only the Plaintiff filed an appeal with only the Plaintiff’s appeal as to the above claim ② Change to seek payment of “5% per annum from July 28, 2017 to the date the appellate court rendered a judgment, 5% per annum, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The Plaintiff’s claim was changed to reduce part of the delayed damages and extended part of the principal and delayed damages.
Therefore, the scope of this Court’s adjudication is limited to “the part of the claim maintained in the trial of the first instance” and “the part of the claim added in the trial of the first instance.”
2. Details, etc. of ruling;
A. On May 29, 2012, the Defendant obtained authorization for the establishment of an association from the Gyeyang-si, and carried out a housing redevelopment and improvement project (hereinafter “project in this case”) at the area of 185,269 square meters in Ansan-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.
The Plaintiff owned real estate in the instant project zone and became the Defendant’s partner, and did not apply for the parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out (from July 27, 2015 to September 4, 2015).