beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 165,441,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from August 9, 2018 to February 13, 2019.
Reasons
1. Details of ruling;
(a) Project approval and announcement 1: B (B) public announcement: The defendant;
B. Objects to be expropriated by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on June 14, 2018: The number of items listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant item”) is indicated in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff.
(2) The starting date of expropriation: Compensation for losses on August 3, 2018: 295,029,000 won: An appraisal corporation: D and E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the above appraiser referred to as “adjudication appraiser”) and the result of the appraisal is referred to as “adjudication appraisal.”
1) Compensation for losses as a result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal: 460,470,000 won: appraiser F (hereinafter the above appraiser is referred to as “court appraiser” and the result of appraisal is referred to as “court appraisal”) 【Ground of recognition”, “No dispute exists, evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion that the appraisal of compensation for the trees of this case is erroneous by excessively lowering the amount of compensation for the trees of this case, the compensation for the trees of this case should be increased according to the court’s appraisal.
B. 1) In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation, in case where the appraisal by each appraisal agency and the appraisal by the court appraiser are not illegal in the appraisal methods and there is no other reason for the appraisal methods, but there is a difference in the appraisal results due to a somewhat different relationship between the appraisal method and the appraisal method except for the individual factor factor factor factor factor, among them, one of the appraisal is recognized as a justifiable compensation amount by taking one of the appraisal methods unless there is any evidence to prove that there is an error in the individual factor factor factor factor of each appraisal, unless it is contrary to the logical rule and the empirical rule (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du4679, Jan. 28, 2005), it is within the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du4679, Jan. 28, 2005).