logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.12.20 2017구합23903
보상금증액
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 338,674,90 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 21, 2017 to December 20, 2018.

Reasons

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: - Urban planning facility project name (B) - Project implementer: Defendant - Public notice of project implementation authorization: C public notice of Busan Metropolitan City on July 27, 2016;

(b) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation on April 13, 2017 - The date of expropriation: June 6, 2017 - The date of expropriation: 2,744,449,150 won (475,282,90 won, including land 2,269,16,250 won, obstacles, etc.) owned by the Plaintiff - The appraisal corporation and the F&A (hereinafter “the result of the appraisal of expropriation”)

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on October 26, 2017 - Compensation for losses: 2,765,671,400 won (land 2,283,428,500 won and obstacles, etc. 482,242,90 won): G Co., Ltd. and H (hereinafter “the result of the appraisal”) as a result of the appraisal by the court’s ruling on expropriation, the first appraisal by the court (I) as a result of the appraisal by the court (I) as a result of the appraisal by the court as a result of the appraisal by G Co., Ltd. and H (hereinafter “the result of the appraisal by the appraisal by the court as a result of the first appraisal by the court as a result of the appraisal by the court as to the first appraisal by the court (I), 269,166, 2502,2502,283,502,502,502,307,530,52648,467,29,2947

(d) The primary appraisal of this Court and the result of the second appraisal of this Court [based on recognition], the entry of Gap Nos. 1-3, Eul Nos. 1-7, and Eul Nos. 1-7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the appraiser I of this Court, and the result of each entrustment to J, the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay the difference between the compensation computed by the court's AppellateJ and the 1st appraiser I, since the plaintiff's objection and the 1st appraiser I were found to be under-calculated.

3. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

4. Determination

A. The appraisal of the relevant legal doctrine requires special knowledge and experience to determine any matter by the court.

arrow