logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.06.08 2014구합962
손실보상금
Text

1. The Defendant’s respective KRW 9,288,985 against each of the Plaintiffs and 5% per annum from May 31, 2012 to June 8, 2016.

Reasons

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project name: Railroad construction project (E construction project) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”);

(2) Project operator: Defendant 3 Notice: F, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Notice on April 16, 2009, G, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Notice on August 27, 2009, H, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Notice on December 4, 2009, H, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Notice on July 8, 201, I, and the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Notice on October 5, 2012.

B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on April 6, 2012: Before K at the time of public housing, 295 square meters (hereinafter “land to be expropriated in this case”).

(2) Amount of compensation: 39,618,500 won: The date of commencement of expropriation: (c) May 30, 2012, the Plaintiffs to the adjudication on expropriation on December 19, 2013 by the Central Land Tribunal on May 30, 2012, shall be the amount of compensation of which is 595 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “L land”).

(A) M 909 square meters prior to M (hereinafter “M land”).

) The NN is 313 square meters (hereinafter “N land”) prior to N, and each of the above land is “each of the instant land” in total.

() Although the claim for compensation for losses was filed due to the decline in the value of the remaining land, the Central Land Tribunal dismissed all the Plaintiffs’ claim on the ground that “L land does not form a group of land due to the difference in land and land category of the instant land subject to expropriation, and M land cannot be deemed significantly difficult to be used for the previous purpose because its area was wide, and no decline in value occurred (the Central Land Tribunal did not explain the reasons for dismissing the claim for expropriation and the claim for compensation for losses of N land).

D. The inheritance and division of each of the instant land were part of M 1,204 square meters prior to the Sinju City, and the said land was divided into the instant land and M 11, 201.

The land of this case and each of the land of this case were owned by O. As the O died on April 29, 2004, the Plaintiffs, the inheritor, succeeded to one-fourths of the land of this case and each of the land of this case.

E. The land to be expropriated in this case and each of the lands in this case are limited.

arrow