If adjudication on expropriation becomes invalid, whether the Central Land Tribunal has taken a disposition to nullify the invalidity thereof.

Where a local land expropriation committee requests a project operator to submit a document attesting the cancellation of the application for auction, the registration of entry, etc. of the land in return for the deposit of the compensation by determining the compensation in the course of accepting the land, such conditional deposit shall be null and void unless the landowner accepts it, and the above adjudication on expropriation shall lose its validity, and the Central Land Expropriation Committee may examine and determine whether the original adjudication is null and void upon an objection by the

Articles 65 and 75(1) of the Land Expropriation Act

Jeonbuk-gu Head of the Jeonbuk-gu

National Land Tribunal (Law No. 800, 198)

Seoul High Court Decision 88Gu10819 delivered on January 13, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal (1) and (2) are also examined.

According to the court below's determination, while the Special Self-Governing Province Land Expropriation decision on the land of this case owned by the non-party, the local Land Expropriation Committee set the compensation amount of KRW 264,655,500. The plaintiff, the project implementer, when depositing the above compensation, demanded the non-party to submit a document proving the commencement of the application for auction, cancellation of the registration of entry and the cancellation of mortgage and superficies.

The plaintiff's conditional deposit is invalid unless the above non-party accepts the above deposit. This is because it falls under the case where the competent Land Tribunal did not pay or deposit the compensation adjudicated, and thus, the adjudication of expropriation by the Land Tribunal of Jeollabuk-do pursuant to Article 65 of the Land Expropriation Act was invalidated. The Central Land Tribunal to deliberate and determine whether the original adjudication was unlawful upon the non-party's objection, may decide whether the original adjudication was invalidated pursuant to Article 75 (1) of the Land Expropriation Act. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)