logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.26 2018누62234
손실보상금증액
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows. The court's explanation of this case is as follows: "50,433,423,333 won" of the first instance court's 6th 11th "50,433,423,330 won (50,433,423,333 won, or less than 10 won)" and "this court" of the first instance court's 7th 11th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 200 as "the first instance court". Thus, it is accepted as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Other matters alleged by the Defendant in the trial are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Defendant in the first instance trial, and even if all of the evidence submitted in the first instance and the trial are examined, the judgment of the first instance court that rejected such argument by the Defendant is justifiable).

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) In light of the fact that, when compensating for business suspension pursuant to Article 47(1)1 of the Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act, the compensation for business suspension is made more than the normal operating profit at the time of normal business activities, and the compensation for expropriation is made by law, the above provision constitutes a compensation provision beyond the limit of delegation of law, and it is unlawful to calculate the compensation pursuant to the above provision. 2) When the Plaintiff, who alleged obstacles installed after the public announcement of the project approval, installs low pressure boiler among the expanded facilities in this case, with the permission of the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do, the Governor of the Special Self-Governing Province, the head of the Si/Gun/Gu did not hear the Defendant’s opinion pursuant to the latter part of Article 25(2) of the Land Compensation Act, and only the purpose of receiving the compensation for business suspension is to receive the compensation for the loss, the added or increased goods shall be

arrow