logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.01.30 2019나2023785
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The plaintiffs' total costs of litigation.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: “The instant road project” is added to “the instant road project” (hereinafter “instant road project”) in the fifth and fourth parallel of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance; “The instant road project” in the 7th parallel of the grounds for the judgment; “The following matters” (hereinafter “instant housing redevelopment improvement project”) are the same as the corresponding part, except for addition of the 7th parallel of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance. Therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The plaintiffs acquired a repurchase right pursuant to Article 91(1) of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”), and the defendant did not notify the plaintiffs of the occurrence of the repurchase right as project operator pursuant to Article 92(1) of the same Act.

Accordingly, since the plaintiffs failed to exercise the right of repurchase within 10 years from the date of acquisition by the defendant, the defendant should compensate the plaintiffs for the damages incurred by the loss of the right of repurchase.

B. The project on each of the instant land was modified from the instant road project to the redevelopment project of the instant housing, which constitutes the alteration of public works under Article 91(6) of the Land Compensation Act, amended by Act No. 13677, Dec. 29, 2015.

Therefore, since each of the lands of this case was not necessary, there was no repurchase right to each of the lands of this case.

3. Determination

A. Article 91(6) of the Land Compensation Act provides that a repurchase right may be exercised only when the original public works are abolished and the conversion is made to a certain public works, provided that the requirements for the exercise of the repurchase right are met on the basis of the converted public works.

arrow