beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,067,50 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from May 1, 2020 to December 10, 2020 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details, etc. of ruling;
(a) Business Approval and Public Notice - B (III) executed by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”) - The E-Public Notice of the Sungsung City on July 6, 2017, C, D, 27 February 2018, and 10 December 10, 2018
B. The Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on March 16, 2020 - The subject of expropriation is divided into G 1,119 square meters into G 43 square meters and H 686 square meters. I 63 square meters divided into one 143 square meters and J 520 square meters; H 686 square meters and J 520 square meters were incorporated into the instant project; among the land excluded from the subject of the said incorporation, I 686 square meters and J 143 square meters were requested to expropriate the remaining land (hereinafter the above determination was included in the subject of compensation; G 1,119 square meters into the instant land; G 43 square meters and H 686 square meters; G 143 square meters; G - 43 square meters, excluding this, are incorporated into the instant land; and the remaining - 4320 square meters and the remaining -43 square meters of the instant land, and the Plaintiff’s remaining -430 square meters and the instant land.
C. Expert K’s appraisal results entrusted by this Court (hereinafter “court appraisal”) - Total compensation for the incorporated land of this case: 276,545,000 won (based on recognition) and no dispute exists, Gap 1 through 4, and Eul 1 (including those with serial number), the result of the court’s appraisal, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;
3. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. In a lawsuit on the increase or decrease of compensation for partial land incorporated into the instant case, insofar as both the appraisal results and the court appraisal results do not constitute an unlawful cause in the assessment methods and there is no evidence to prove that there is an error in the assessment contents, what kind of the appraisal results should be more trusted.