Administrative litigation (negative) seeking revocation of adjudication on expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal (negative)

According to the provisions of Articles 73 through 75-2 of the Land Expropriation Act, a person who has an objection against the adjudication on expropriation of land by the central or local land expropriation committee shall file an objection with the Central Land Expropriation Committee within one month from the date of service of the original copy of the written adjudication, and if he/she is dissatisfied with the adjudication on an objection filed by the Central Land Expropriation Committee, an administrative litigation seeking the cancellation of such adjudication shall be filed within one month from the date of service of the original copy of the said written adjudication, and in this case, the provisions of Articles 18 and 20 of the Administrative Appeals Act shall be interpreted as not being applicable, and therefore, the administrative litigation seeking its cancellation shall be unlawful.

Articles 73 and 75-2 of the Land Expropriation Act, Articles 18 and 20 of the Administrative Appeals Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee)

Lee-heat et al.

Attorney Park Jong-yang et al., Counsel for the Central Land Tribunal

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu11056 delivered on January 12, 1990

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the provisions of Articles 73 through 75-2 of the Land Expropriation Act, a person who has an objection against the adjudication on expropriation of land by the central or local land expropriation committee shall file an objection with the Central Land Expropriation Committee within one month from the date of service of the original copy of the written adjudication, and if a person is dissatisfied with the adjudication on an objection filed by the Central Land Expropriation Committee, he shall file an administrative litigation seeking the cancellation of such adjudication within one month from the date of service of the original copy of the written adjudication, and in this case, the provisions of Articles 18 and 20 of the Administrative Appeals Act shall be interpreted as not being applicable (see Supreme Court Decision 88Nu598, Mar. 28, 198).

Therefore, it is inappropriate to institute the administrative litigation of this case against the expropriation ruling by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on May 19, 1989 on the land of this case owned by the plaintiffs and seeking its revocation. Therefore, there is no error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles in the original decision dismissed. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)