1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the allegations emphasized by the plaintiff in this court, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(a) An additional determination; 2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s claim was made on March 8, 2019 regarding the Z appraiser’s office (T) of the court of first instance (hereinafter “the first court appraisal”). In the result of the commission of appraisal by the court of first instance (hereinafter “the first court appraisal”), U land was selected as a comparative standard for each of the instant lands. The comparison standard for each of the instant lands should be the V land, such as the result of the commission of appraisal by the court of first instance on October 7, 2019 (hereinafter “the second court appraisal”).

This is because each land in this case should be evaluated as being subject to the restriction of the instant district unit planning (referring to the district unit planning publicly notified as Y on July 12, 2013, which can be seen below), and U land is not subject to the restriction of the instant district unit planning, because the V land subject to the restriction of the instant district unit planning in the same manner as each land in this case is more suitable as the comparative standard.

Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 229,057,150 [a fixed amount of KRW 229,057,650 [a fixed amount of KRW 1,468,324,80 - 1,239,267,150] calculated by deducting KRW 1,239,267,150 as compensation for losses under the instant ruling from the second court appraisal [a fixed amount of KRW 229,057,650 [a fixed amount of KRW 1,468,324,80 in - 1,239,267,1

B. The Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that in a lawsuit seeking increase in compensation for losses in the relevant legal doctrine, the amount of reasonable compensation exceeds the amount of compensation for losses as set forth in that ruling.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Du12226, Oct. 15, 2004). The Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects is below the same.