(a) Where the price of land at the time of the commencement of development project is calculated by the officially announced land price, if the price of individual land is determined by the publicly announced land price, whether it shall be determined thereby;

(b) Standards for appraisal in cases where the land categories on public register and actual conditions are different in the appraisal of land prices;

A. In light of the contents of each provision of Article 10(3) and (1) of the former Restitution of Development Gains Act (amended by Act No. 4563 of Jun. 11, 1993), and the purport of each individual land price comparison guidelines (amended by the Prime Minister Directive No. 241 of Apr. 14, 1990 and the Prime Minister Directive No. 248 of Apr. 2, 1991), in cases where an administrative agency shall calculate the land price by applying a comparison table under Article 10 of the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Lands, etc. of Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Lands, etc. on the basis of the officially announced land price of reference land for administrative purposes, the land price for which the determination of individual land price has been publicly announced shall be determined based on the individual land price unless there are special circumstances such as where there were errors in the determination of individual land price or where the current status of land at the time of the determination of individual land price has been significantly changed, and thus no other land price is recognized.

B. In the appraisal of land price, if the land category on public record and the actual status are different, it shall be evaluated on the basis of the actual status rather than on public record, and if the change of the form and quality of the land subject to appraisal is deemed that the change of the present status has been made after the change of form and quality was completed, it shall be reasonable to evaluate the current status based on the changed actual

Articles 10(3) and 10(1) of the former Restitution of Development Gains Act, Article 10 of the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Lands, etc. Act, and guidelines for the joint investigation of individual land prices;

A. Supreme Court Decision 93Nu1237 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Dong Branch), 93Nu2162 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Dong Branch), 93Nu4557 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Dong Branch), 93Nu12305 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Dong Branch), 93Nu14189 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Dong Branch), 93Nu1879 delivered on April 12, 1994 (Gong194 delivered on March 27, 1990)

Hyundai Industrial Development Corporation

200

Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu14962 delivered on February 4, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 10 (3) of the former Restitution of Development Gains Act (amended by Act No. 4563 of Jun. 11, 1993) provides that the value of the land subject to imposition of the time of the commencement of the development project for the calculation of the development charges shall be the amount calculated by adding the increases in normal land prices from the base date of the officially announced land price to the time of the commencement of the development project, to the value calculated by adding the increases in normal land prices from the base date of the officially announced land price to the time of the commencement of the development project. Article 10 (1) of the same Act provides that "the value calculated by the publicly announced land price"

However, under the Prime Minister’s Directive No. 241 of Apr. 11, 1990 (wholly amended by the Prime Minister’s Directive No. 248 of Apr. 2, 1991), where the State or a local government has to calculate the price of individual land by applying the comparison table pursuant to Article 10 of the Land Price Disclosure Act on the basis of the officially announced land price for administrative purposes, the head of the Si/Gun/Gu has publicly announced the price of individual land for the purpose of uniform use after deliberation by the Local Land Appraisal Committee every year and confirmation by the Minister of Construction and Transportation. In light of the purpose of such individual land price system, where an administrative agency is to calculate the price of land by applying the comparison table pursuant to Article 10 of the Land Price Disclosure Act on the basis of the officially announced land price of the standard land for administrative purposes, the price of individual land shall be determined based on the price of individual land, unless there are special circumstances, such as where the administrative agency erred in the determination of the price of individual land, or the current status of land at the time of the individual land price is not recognized.

In addition, in the appraisal of land price, if the land category in the public record and the actual status are different, it shall be evaluated on the basis of the actual status rather than the land category in the public record, and if the change of the form and quality of the land subject to appraisal is made when the change of the form and quality in the land subject to appraisal is made, it is reasonable to evaluate the current status based on the changed status even if it

According to the facts duly confirmed by the court below and evidence Nos. 17-1 through 25 (each land characteristics survey table) of this case, land of this case, which was viewed as the starting point of the development project of this case, was already filled up and now under progress by the Aggregate Construction Corporation. Thus, a significant change in the form and quality of the land of this case seems to have been made due to the completion of alteration in the form and quality of the land of this case, and the price of the individual land of this case as of January 1, 1990 as of the land of this case is calculated on the basis of the actual change in the base point of time. The price of the individual land of this case as of January 1, 1990 shall be calculated on the basis of the actual status of the change in the base point of time. Since there is no special circumstance that the individual land price of this case is determined and announced on January 1, 1990 among the land of this case, the price of the land of this case and the value of the donated land shall not be applied.

All arguments are without merit.

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

Justices Jeong Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)