logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1982. 3. 23. 선고 81누103 판결
[토지수용재결처분취소][집30(1)특,105;공1982.6.1.(681) 471]
Main Issues

Where the standard land price is publicly announced at the time of the adjudication of expropriation and the standard land price is publicly notified thereafter, the calculation of compensation for expropriation.

Summary of Judgment

The computation of the amount of losses caused by the expropriation of land must be based on the time of the adjudication of expropriation. Thus, as long as the standard land price was the public notice of the target area at the time of the adjudication of expropriation, and the standard land price was not public notice, even if the standard land price was public notice prior to the adjudication of a domestic objection, the amount of losses cannot be calculated based on the standard

[Reference Provisions]

Article 46 (1) of the Land Expropriation Act, Article 29 of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 73Nu214 delivered on March 12, 1974, 76Nu278 delivered on March 8, 1977

Plaintiff-Appellee

Lee Tae-tae et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee

Defendant-Appellant

Attorney Kim Jong-young, Counsel for the Central Land Tribunal

Intervenor joining the Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 80Gu265 delivered on February 18, 1981

Text

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the standard price for the target area was applied retroactively to August 21, 1978, which was the land owned by the plaintiffs, which was included in the difficult garbage and garbage disposal facility project execution zone implemented by the defendant's assistant intervenor, and the defendant made a ruling of acceptance on August 16, 1979 and the plaintiffs dismissed the plaintiffs' objection on February 29, 1980, and the Minister of Construction and Transportation publicly announced the target area of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Urban Planning Zone under the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, including the Construction Part No. 81 of August 21, 1978, and publicly announced the standard price for the target area under the Construction Part No. 467 of the Construction Part No. 467 of December 12, 1979. The above standard price was determined before the base price was publicly notified at the time of this decision, and thus, it could not be calculated by applying the standard price at the time of the application of the above provision.

According to the provisions of Article 29 (3) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, while the assessment of the standard price is required to be conducted and assessed as of the date of public announcement, the public announcement of the standard price cannot be deemed to take effect retroactively to the date of public announcement of the target area. Unlike this, there are no grounds to deem that the public announcement of the standard price becomes effective retroactively as of the date of public announcement of the target area, and the calculation of the amount of loss caused by the expropriation of land should be based on the time of public announcement of expropriation. As long as the standard price was the public announcement of the target area at the time of the decision of expropriation of land as stated in the judgment of the court below and the standard price was not publicly announced, even if the standard price was publicly announced before the decision of the household affairs objection, it shall be deemed that the calculation of the amount of

Therefore, as seen above, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the calculation standards of losses caused by the expropriation of land, and therefore, it is reasonable to discuss this point.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeong Jong-tae (Presiding Justice) Kim Jong-young (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1981.2.18.선고 80구265
본문참조조문
기타문서