logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.08.27 2018누77915
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. As to the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasoning of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial revision as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In the third 10th of the judgment of the first instance court, the "Appraiser K" shall be deemed "K (hereinafter referred to as "court appraiser") of the first instance court."

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance court, "the result of the court appraisal" in Part 17 is "the result of the request for appraisal to the court appraiser of the first instance court".

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be referred to as "as" in the 16th sentence.

The first instance court's 8th trial's 19th to 9th trial's 8th trial's 19th trial's 1th trial's

C. The plaintiffs argued that the court appraiser's appraisal of additional appraisal or re-appraisal was erroneous in calculating the transfer cost without considering these circumstances, since the court appraiser's appraisal result was made as a special material made by sti-phering the sti-phere with a view to extremely sensitive to external stithic, such as vibration, temperature, damp, light, etc., by failing to consider the unique characteristics of the work of this case, and thus, the loss caused by the external stimulation was not caused by the above external stimulation. The plaintiffs mispers that the loss caused by theft, loss, and damage could be replaced by the insurance premium unrelated to actual loss. At the time of the ruling of expropriation, although the building to finally keep the work of this case was not newly constructed at the temporary storage at the time of the ruling of expropriation, it was erroneous in calculating the transfer cost, etc., without considering these circumstances. Thus, the court appraiser's appraisal or re-appraisal that should re

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as being added to the results of the inquiry into the court's expert witness at the court of first instance, and the results of the inquiry into the court's expert witness at the court of first instance, ①.

arrow