logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.04.23 2019구합63677
손실보상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

A. 1) The status of the party in Gwangju City is as follows: (a) the Gwangju City published on August 31, 2015; (b) the Gwangju City published on March 12, 2018; and (c) the Gwangju City published on October 30, 2018; and (c) the Gwangju City Urban Planning Facility Project (F Urban Planning Road Opening Works) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Project”).

(2) The Plaintiff owned 498m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) in Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si, which was incorporated into the instant project site.

B. On January 14, 2019, the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation (the date of commencement of expropriation: February 28, 2019) with respect to the compensation for the instant land, as the Defendant did not enter into an agreement on compensation for losses with the Plaintiff and the instant land, the Defendant applied for a ruling of expropriation to the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal.

The amount of adjudication on the land category subject to this case’s land category is 4308,00 forest land and 3308,000 forest land and 334,640,640,624,000 forest land and 342,624,00 [based on recognition] without dispute, each entry in Gap’s 1,6, and 7 evidence, the purport of all pleadings, and the purport of all pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Republic of Korea illegally completed registration of preservation of ownership of the instant land, which is the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the Republic of Korea subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Republic of Korea, thereby recovering the ownership of the instant land.

However, prior to the Plaintiff’s recovery of ownership, a road was built on a 330 square meters of the instant land, and accordingly, in the instant expropriation ruling, the compensation for the said portion was assessed as a road having been in use. However, on the following grounds, the compensation for the said portion ought to be assessed as a forest standard.

Therefore, the Defendant’s compensation amounting to KRW 408,540,000 (=300 square meters x 1,238,000) and the standard compensation amount for road.

arrow