The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

When the land in dispute is incorporated into a site for road construction under the Urban Planning Act according to the urban planning of the Si and the use of the surrounding city, such as the division of a housing site or the construction of a building, etc., is naturally used as a road through which neighboring residents pass through the urban planning line, and thereafter, if the urban road construction project was conducted, the land should not be considered when assessing the price of the land to calculate the amount of compensation, and the land is incorporated into a road.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da25045 delivered on November 10, 1992, etc.). Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment and the circumstances that were known by the record, such as the developments leading up to the construction of a road, etc. after being designated as a prospective road site by the instant public notice in the holding of the lower court under the condition that the present state of the instant land in this case was “former,” in light of the above legal principles, the instant land should be appraised as “former,” which is the present state before being

Therefore, while the reasoning of the lower judgment is somewhat inappropriate, the lower court’s determination that the circumstances incorporated into roads should not be considered while appraising the instant land. As a result, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by misapprehending relevant

Therefore, the appeal is 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.