In accordance with the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, the method of calculating the amount of compensation for expropriation where there is no selection of the reference land;

In the case of accepting land which cannot be seen as being a notice of legitimate standard land price due to the lack of the selection of the reference land due to the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, there is no way to calculate the amount of compensation based on the standard land according to the provisions of Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory.

Article 29 of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, Article 46(1) of the Land Expropriation Act

Supreme Court Decision 87Nu569, 570, 571 Decided December 27, 198

[Judgment of the court below]

The Central Land Expropriation Committee

Seoul High Court Decision 88Gu6155 delivered on February 14, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the litigation performer in the lawsuit are examined.

In the case of expropriation of land which cannot be seen as a legitimate standard price due to the lack of the selection of the reference land in accordance with the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, it is difficult to calculate the compensation amount based on the standard land price pursuant to Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory. Therefore, the compensation amount shall be determined according to the general method of calculation of compensation under Article 46(1) of the Land Expropriation Act

Party members (see Supreme Court Decision 87Nu569, 570, 571 decided Dec. 27, 198).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, although the land price is publicly announced pursuant to Article 29 (1) and (2) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory before the original adjudication is made on the land in which the land in this case is located, the land category of the land in this case is miscellaneous and the house and stable are constructed before the original adjudication is made on the land in this case, and the two appraisal agencies in this case's explanation of appraisal request made by the defendant at the time of the ruling on the objection of this case was made on the appraisal for the assessment of compensation for losses. The two appraisal agencies in this case's explanation of appraisal request made by the defendant are selected as the standard land price for the land in the Dong-gu, Daegu Special Metropolitan City and Dong-gu, which is the answer because the land in this case is recognized as a miscellaneous land but the reference land of the same category is not designated in the neighboring area, and the appraisal agency's appraisal of the land in this case is justified as it is without merit in the conclusion of the judgment below.

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.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)