beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's main claim is dismissed;
2. An objection to the trial;
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a project implementer designated as a project implementer for urban planning facilities under Article 86 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act for the purpose of the Suwon-si Urban Planning Facility Project (hereinafter “C Opening Construction Project in Suwon-si,” “green : Greenbelt 13,” “C Corporation,” and “the instant project”). The Defendant is the owner of buildings and obstacles indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant buildings and obstacles”) incorporated into the instant project, and the E large 133 square meters in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si (hereinafter “each of the instant land”). The instant building and obstacles and each of the instant land are combined with each of the instant land.
B. The Plaintiff consulted with the Defendant to acquire the subject matter of this case for the implementation of the instant project, but did not reach an agreement as to the difference in the amount of compensation. On February 6, 2012, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal, upon the Plaintiff’s application for adjudication, accepted the subject matter of this case for the instant project and rendered a ruling of expropriation on March 6, 2012.
On February 28, 2012, prior to the date of expropriation, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 336,50,850 as Suwon District Court’s Deposit No. 1383 in accordance with Article 40(2)1 of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor (hereinafter “instant deposit”).
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap's evidence 1 to Gap's evidence 6, purport of whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim of the principal lawsuit, as long as the Plaintiff deposited the deposited money, which is compensation for losses as stipulated in the above acceptance ruling prior to the date of commencement of expropriation, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the object of this case.
The Plaintiff’s building and obstacles to the instant case.