logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.12.16 2014구합58243
손실보상금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,698,800 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from March 19, 2014 to August 13, 2015.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: B housing site development project (hereinafter referred to as "project of this case"): Public notice - C- Project operator of the project on March 26, 2009

(b) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on January 23, 2014 (hereinafter “adjudication of expropriation”): - The amount of compensation for losses: 266,766,000 square meters before D Special Metropolitan City, Kimhae-si (hereinafter “instant land subject to expropriation”): The date of commencement of expropriation: the central appraisal corporation, the central appraisal corporation, and the joint appraisal corporation dialogue.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection on August 21, 2014 (hereinafter “adjudication”) - Compensation amount: 273,409,200 won - An appraisal corporation: the Korea Appraisal Board and the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter “Appraisal Board”) as well as the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter “Appraisal Board”) for the appraisal of the appraisal corporation; and the result of the appraisal thereof “the result of the appraisal of the adjudication”).

D. The result of the commission of appraisal to appraiser E of this Court (hereinafter referred to as the “court appraiser”) - Compensation amount: 276,108,00 won : The fact that there is no dispute about the ground for recognition / The evidence Nos. 1-1, 11-2-1, and 2-1; the result of the commission of appraisal to appraiser E; the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As to the land to be expropriated by the Plaintiff’s assertion, the compensation determined by the expropriation ruling does not reach a reasonable compensation for losses, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the difference between the court’s appraisal amount and the amount of the adjudication, and damages for delay.

B. In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation 1, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and the appraisal by a court appraiser, which form the basis for the adjudication on expropriation, are not illegal in the appraisal methods, and there is no other reason in the appraisal methods, but in the consideration of the remaining price assessment factors except for individual factors and vision, they are consistent with each other.

arrow