The effects of the receipt of the deposit money for land expropriation compensation, unless an objection is reserved during the lawsuit against the adjudication of land expropriation or the continuation of an objection;

In cases where public project operators deposit land expropriation compensation adjudicated by the Land Tribunal, if the landowner has received it without reserving any objection to the deposit, the full amount of compensation shall be deemed to have been received in accordance with the purport of the deposit by withdrawing the previous rejection of receipt and taking over the adjudication. The fact that the deposit is simply a lawsuit or an objection against the purpose of the deposit at the time the deposit was received cannot be deemed to have reserved an objection against the receipt of the deposit.

Article 61(2)1 of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 487 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellee-

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 1 others, Counsel for defendant-appellee

The Central Land Expropriation Committee

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu6961 delivered on June 20, 1990

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the Plaintiffs’ grounds of appeal.

In case where public project operators deposited land expropriation compensation adjudicated by the Land Expropriation Committee under Article 61 (2) 1 of the Land Expropriation Act, if the landowner has received it without reserving any objection to the deposit, it shall be deemed to have received the full amount of compensation in accordance with the purport of deposit by withdrawing the previous rejection of receipt and taking in return for the adjudication. The fact that a lawsuit or an objection is filed merely against the purpose of deposit at the time of receiving the deposit is not the same as the reservation of objection to the receipt of the deposit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Nu197, Nov. 9, 1982; Supreme Court Decision 81Nu254, Jun. 14, 1983). The decision of the court below to the same purport is correct and it is not justified, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the receipt of the deposit.

Therefore, all appeals are 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 on the bench.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)