logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.05.08 2019구단51366
기타(기타 도시정비)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 17,99,975 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from November 30, 2019 to May 8, 2020.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a project implementer for the redevelopment and rearrangement project of B houses (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”).

With respect to the instant rearrangement project, on January 12, 2009, the public announcement was made for the public inspection of residents for the formulation of the rearrangement plan, and the public announcement was made thereafter.

B. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City land and its ground residential buildings located within the instant improvement project zone (hereinafter “instant housing”), became a person subject to cash settlement because he did not apply for parcelling-out within the period for application for parcelling-out set by the Defendant.

C. The Defendant filed an application for adjudication against the Plaintiff, who did not purchase real estate by negotiation, and rendered a ruling of expropriation on January 23, 2018.

On October 24, 2002, the Plaintiff transferred his resident registration to the instant house on May 7, 2008, and maintained the resident registration by the date of the said decision of expropriation after moving his resident registration to D, Jung-gu, Incheon on April 24, 2009, Sungsung apartment F, Jung-gu, Incheon on November 6, 2009, and transferred his resident registration to D, and on April 25, 201, the Plaintiff transferred his resident registration to the instant house.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of obligation to pay housing relocation expenses, relocation expenses, and resettlement subsidies;

A. The key issue of the instant case is whether the Plaintiff, who was the owner of a residential building, was the subject of cash liquidation, and whether the Plaintiff is the subject of “director’s expenses” immediately incurred at the time of the authorization for the implementation of public works as a resident of a residential building incorporated into a public works project implementation zone as a resident of a residential building, who was relocated due to the implementation of the public works project, is subject to the payment of the cost of housing relocation by continuing to own and reside in the instant house from January 12, 2009 to January 23, 2018, which is the date of the public inspection and announcement of the maintenance plan, which is the date of the public inspection and announcement of the public inspection of the maintenance plan, until January 23, 2018.

arrow