(a) Method of selecting the reference land in order to compensate for losses where he expropriates land within the area where the reference land price is publicly announced;

(b) The reference point for the selection of reference land for land to be expropriated;

(a) Compensation for losses where land is expropriated within the area where the reference land price is publicly announced shall be calculated on the basis of the reference land price publicly announced for the reference land for the land to be expropriated. The reference land for the land to be expropriated shall be determined on the basis of whether the reference land price is located in the area where the reference land is to be expropriated and whether its category and grade are the same as that of the reference land to be expropriated. Therefore, where several reference land are publicly announced within the area where the same reference land price is to be selected, the reference land price for the land to be expropriated shall be determined on the basis of the location, utilization, surrounding environment, traffic conditions, and other natural and social conditions which are deemed most similar. Furthermore, the reference land price for such reference land shall be determined on the basis of the reference land price publicly announced, and all price factors, such as the normal market price of neighboring similar land stipulated in Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of National Territory

(b) The main sentence of Article 17(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory stipulates that the standard land price for the reference land is the date of public announcement of the area subject to public announcement, and since the standard land price for compensation for losses for the land to be expropriated is the date of expropriation adjudication, the price assessment shall be the one similar to the situation of use at the time of adjudication on expropriation

A. Article 29(5) of the former Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory (amended by Act No. 4120 of Apr. 1, 1989)

A. Supreme Court Decision 86Nu334 delivered on May 12, 1987 (Gong1987,91) 88Nu3604 delivered on August 8, 1989 (Gong1989,1369) (Gong1369) 88Nu10756 delivered on September 12, 1989 (Gong1989,1494) b. Supreme Court Decision 88Nu8647 delivered on December 27, 198 (Gong1989,248)

Attorney Park Jae-sik et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant

The Central Land Expropriation Committee

Korea National Housing Corporation and Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant Kim-jin et al., Counsel for the defendant defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 88Gu8595 delivered on April 10, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant and the defendant joining the defendant.

As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and the Intervenor joining the Defendant:

In calculating the amount of compensation for losses for the land to be expropriated, the above land is to be applied to the building site of this case. Article 46 (2) of the former Land Expropriation Act (amended by Act No. 4120 of Apr. 1, 1989), Article 29 (1) and (3) through (5) of the former Act (amended by Act No. 4120 of Apr. 1, 1989), Article 48 (1) and (2), Article 49 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12781 of Aug. 18, 1989), and Article 17 (1) through (4), and Article 18 (1) through (8) of the same Act are to be constructed on the building site of this case. It is to be determined that the land to be expropriated is the same as that of the new land to be expropriated, and that the land to be expropriated should be calculated on the same land category as that of the new land to be expropriated.

In addition, according to the records, the number of appraisal of the land in this case was 127 percent of the price of the land in this case as the standard land in appraisal of the compensation price for the land in this case. In consideration of the regional factors and individual factors, the price fluctuation rate of 127 percent of the above land in the above 241-2 site is considered, and the compensation example of the above 364-1 site, which is neighboring land, and the compensation example of the above 182-1 site in the above 182-1 site in the above 182-1 site in the above 182-1 site, which is neighboring land, was the Si/Eup, and the large-scale housing complex was constructed around the land in this case, and the comprehensive sports complex was constructed and an agro-industrial complex was developed, and the compensation price of the land in this case was calculated as 93,700 won per ordinary price of neighboring land by applying the above 120 percent of the compensation price of the land in this case. Based on the above facts, the court below determined that the two appraisal price of this case cannot be reasonably reflected of the standard of the above.

The above fact-finding by the court below is acceptable and it cannot be deemed that there was an error of misconception of facts or incomplete deliberation due to violation of the rules of evidence, and there is no error of law in the judgment of the court below in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the selection of reference land or the method of calculating compensation amount. Among the grounds of appeal, the purport of Article 17 (2) of the Enforcement Rule of the National Land Utilization Management Act is that the reference land price shall be determined based on the land use situation as of the date of public notice of the area subject to public notice of the reference land price as at the time of public notice of the area subject to public notice of the reference land price as at the date of public notice of the reference land price as at the date of public notice of the reference land price as at the date of public notice of the reference land price as at the date of expropriation (see Supreme Court Decision 88Nu8647 delivered on December 27, 198). Therefore, in the price evaluation of reference land, the reference land which is most similar to the surrounding environment at the time of public notice of the reference

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 Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)