[1] In a case where part of the land is expropriated as the site for the electric wire support under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Electric Source Development, and the electric wire is installed in the remaining ground space of the remaining land under the Electric Utility Act, whether the loss of the price of the remaining land due to the installation of the ground space of the said electric wire is subject to compensation for the remaining land under Article 47 of the Land Expropriation Act (affirmative), and whether the financial procedure under Article 58(2) of the Electric Utility Act is necessary and bound with respect to the loss of the price of the remaining land due to the installation of the ground space of the said electric wire (negative)

[2] The method of calculating compensation for losses due to the decrease in the price of the remaining land in the case of the partial expropriation of another's land for the installation of electric lines and the use of the space for the electric wires on the remaining land

[1] Article 47 of the Land Expropriation Act provides that compensation for losses shall be made when the price of a group of land belonging to the same landowner decreases due to expropriation or use of part of the land, including cases where a decrease in the remaining land price occurs due to a price formation factor such as the conditions of the plot of land or access conditions, etc. due to expropriation or use of part of the land, as well as cases where an electric source developer under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Electric Source Development takes part of the land belonging to another person as the site of an electric wire tower pursuant to Article 6-2 of the aforementioned Act and takes part of the land as the site of the electric wire tower under Article 57(1) of the Electric Utility Act, and if the remaining land price is reduced due to the expropriation or use of part of the land, the procedure of adjudication on expropriation or use under the Land Expropriation Act is not only applicable to cases where the price formation factor such as the conditions of the plot of land or access condition is changed, but also to cases where the land tribunal is not required to apply for compensation for losses under Article 58(2) of the former Electric Utility Act.

[2] According to Articles 45 through 47 and 57-2 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 4 of the Public Land Expropriation Act, and Article 8(2) and Article 26(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Land Expropriation for the Construction of Electric Lines, compensation for losses due to the reduction of the price of the remaining land subject to expropriation along with the price of the land subject to expropriation and the usage fee of the remaining ground space on the remaining land for the construction of electric lines, shall be calculated by subtracting the price of the remaining land converted from the price of the land to be incorporated into the land for the purpose of expropriation under Article 26(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Special Cases Concerning Land Expropriation

[1] Article 47 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 6-2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Electric Source Development, Articles 25(2), 57(1), and 58 of the former Electric Utility Act (amended by Act No. 5830 of Feb. 8, 1999) / [2] Articles 45, 46, 47, and 57-2 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Electric Source Development, Article 8(2), and Article 26(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Public Compensation and Compensation of Loss Act

Plaintiff

Central Land Tribunal and one other (Attorney Song-dae, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Daejeon High Court Decision 98Nu326 delivered on September 10, 1999

The part of the judgment below against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daejeon High Court.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

Article 47 of the Land Expropriation Act provides that the compensation for losses shall be made when the price of the remaining land is reduced due to the expropriation or use of part of a group of land belonging to the same landowner. This includes not only cases where the price reduction of the remaining land takes place due to the price formation factors such as the conditions of the plot of land or the conditions of access due to the expropriation or use of part of the land, but also cases where the land is generated due to the form, structure, use, etc. of the facilities installed by the execution

Therefore, in accordance with Article 6-2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Electric Source Development, an electric source developer under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Electric Source Development, expropriates part of the land owned by another person as the site for the electric wire tower, and in addition, pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Electric Utility Act, any loss incurred by the reduction of the price of the remaining land by temporarily installing an electric cable in the ground space of the remaining land in accordance with Article 57(1) of the Electric Utility Act, falls under the subject of compensation for the remaining land under Article 47 of the Land Expropriation Act

However, Article 58(2) of the Electric Utility Act provides that a person may apply for an adjudication to the Mayor/Do Governor with respect to the compensation for losses caused by the construction of the ground space in the electric lines as above. However, this does not provide that the financial procedure is necessary and binding in its language and text, and the subject of the adjudication is not the institution in exclusive charge of the adjudication on the compensation for losses, such as the Land Tribunal, but the head of a local government is the head of a general local government, and if the adjudication is made, the parties shall be deemed to have reached an agreement pursuant to the provisions of Articles 58(3) and 25(2) of the same Act (amended by Act No. 5830 of Feb. 8, 1999). In light of the above, the financial procedure shall not be deemed as a separate necessary procedure or an exclusive procedure to exclude the compensation procedure under the Land Expropriation Act as to the remaining land as seen earlier.

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation's temporary installation of the high voltage power transmission line of this case 36,142 square meters owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the land No. 1") is not necessarily subject to the financial procedure under the Electric Utility Act as to the loss of price reduction in the second land due to the temporary installation of the high voltage power transmission line of this case 35,325 square meters (hereinafter referred to as "the land No. 2"), and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. The ground of appeal on this point is not acceptable.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

A. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, in the case where Defendant Korea Electric Power Corporation established a steel tower for the instant high-tension transmission line on the land which is part of the instant land, and intends to expropriate the instant land and use part of the ground space on the instant land for executing the electric power resource development business with the installation of the high voltage line on the remaining part of the ground space of the instant land, which is part of the instant land, 7,067,050 won for the first land as of December 197 after the adjudication of expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal was made on July 16, 1997, 7,000 won and only 7,067,050 won for the instant land as of December 19, 197. The court below acknowledged the appraisal result by the appraiser of the court below as the adequate price at the time of the adjudication of expropriation of the instant land, including 1,2,00 won and 30,000 won and 250,000 won and 305,007,00 won and 375,07,00.

B. According to Articles 45 to 47 and 57 Section 2 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 4 of the Special Act on the Compensation for Public Loss, and Articles 8 Section 2 and 26 Section 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Special Act on the Settlement of Land for Public Use, Article 4 of the Special Act on the Settlement of Land, and Article 8 Section 2 and Article 26 Section 2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Special Act on the Settlement of Land, the compensation for losses due to a decrease in the price of the remaining land subject to expropriation together with the price of the land subject to expropriation for the installation of electric lines and the rent for the use of the space for the installation of electric wires on the remaining land on the remaining land shall be calculated by subtracting the price of the remaining land converted from the price of the land to be incorporated into the land for the purpose of expropriation in accordance with Article 26

However, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, although high voltage transmission lines of 345kV had already been installed in the above ground space of the land of this case, the appraiser's appraisal report of the court below is deemed as 9,000/m2 at the time of expropriation of the land of 1 or 2, considering the status where the above existing high voltage transmission lines have been installed (record 277, 279), while calculating the appraisal price of the land of this case due to the decline in the price of 2 or more high voltage transmission lines of neighboring areas where no high voltage transmission lines have been installed at all, the appraisal price of the land of this case was calculated by comparing the officially announced price of other reference land of neighboring areas where the above existing high voltage transmission lines and the above high voltage transmission lines of this case are installed (record 292, 294, 295, 295, 295, 2000/m295).

Nevertheless, the court below, however, has adopted the appraisal result of the court below's appraisal as it is and calculated the amount of compensation due to the reduction of the price of the second land. Thus, this is ultimately erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the calculation of the remaining amount of compensation, or in violation of the rules of evidence, thereby affecting the conclusion

3. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)