beta
Text
The instant lawsuit is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
(a) Project approval and announcement 1): E development project (hereinafter “instant project”);
(2) Project operator: Defendant 3’s public notice: F on June 16, 2015; and G on February 29, 2016;
B. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Appointed Party B, C, and D are the owners of 1/4 shares of H forest land No. 9,322 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
C. On April 18, 2016, the Chungcheongnam-do Regional Land Tribunal: (a) decided on June 2, 2016 on the compensation for losses to the Plaintiff and designated parties, respectively; and (b) decided on June 2, 2016 on the date of expropriation (hereinafter “instant adjudication on expropriation”). D.
The written ruling of acceptance of this case was served on April 21, 2016 to the Plaintiff, Appointors C, and Selection B, and on April 22, 2016 to the Appointors D, respectively.
[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 3-2, Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2-1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate or not, the defendant raised by the plaintiff after the lapse of the period for filing the lawsuit of this case, and the defense of this case is unlawful.
Article 85(1) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor provides that an administrative litigation against a expropriation ruling may be filed within 60 days from the date of receiving a written adjudication.
However, the fact that the Plaintiff and the designated parties filed the instant lawsuit seeking the increase of compensation for losses on June 22, 2016, after the lapse of 60 days from April 21, 2016 and April 22, 2016, which was subject to the instant written adjudication of acceptance, is apparent in the record, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it was filed after the lapse of the filing period.
The defendant's main defense is reasonable.
3. In conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.