logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.12.12 2013누13916
손실보상금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding any supplementary judgment below, thereby citing it in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420

2. Supplementary judgment

A. In a case where the cadastral record of each of the instant lands alleged by the Plaintiffs is preserved without being destroyed or lost, and where the fact of acquiring ownership by the State is not indicated in the said cadastral record, the presumption of autonomous possession by the State is broken, barring special circumstances.

The state, at the time of possession and commencement of use of each of the lands of this case, is preserved as it is without any loss. A copy of the register on each of the lands of this case is preserved as it is, and at the time of the construction of a bank in the register of the register, there is the fact that the Japanese governor acquired the ownership through donation or sale by the Japanese governor at the time of the construction of the bank. On the other hand, the land without the register of each of the lands of this case, such as each of the lands of this case, did not have a record of the register, but did not have a record of ownership preservation from the beginning. The land in the register of this case at the time of the bank construction did not have a record of ownership preservation, but did not have a record of ownership preservation, were incorporated into the bank site without permission for each of the lands of this case without due process of ownership acquisition. Despite the fact that it is difficult to expect the submission of documents on each of the lands of this case, the state did not have an objective data that it acquired the ownership of each of the lands of this case or did not have been submitted.

(b).

arrow