In calculating the amount of land expropriation compensation, whether the circumstance that the land to be expropriated is located in the land partition rearrangement zone has become an index for the determination of the standard land for such land.

Article 29 (5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory provides that the standard price for the standard land for the land subject to expropriation shall be determined by the publicly notified standard land price for the standard land for the land subject to expropriation in accordance with Article 29 (1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, and the standard land for the land shall be interpreted as only one standard land with the same land category and grade among the standard land for each land which is determined in advance according to the classification by land category within the relevant region, and the situation that the land is located within the land zone subject to the adjustment of land zone shall be determined based on the standard land price as above. This does not constitute an index for the determination of the standard land for the land.

Article 29(1) and Article 29(5) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Utilization and Management

Plaintiff 1 and 1 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee-appellant

Attorney Lee Jae-chul, Counsel for the Central Land Tribunal

Appellant Korea National Housing Corporation (Attorney Lee Jae-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu1297 delivered on March 6, 1986

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

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined the expropriation compensation amount based on each appraisal report of the new land appraisal company and the new land appraisal company's joint office and the new land appraisal company's joint office of land appraisal company's land appraisal company's assessment report of this case's land of this case as the standard land price was located in the area where the Minister of Construction and Transportation publicly announced the standard land price pursuant to Article 29 (1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory in December 12, 1979, and the land of this case was located in the area where the standard land price was designated before the above land price was publicly announced, and the land price of this case's land of this case should be calculated based on the standard land price of this case's appraisal report of this case's land of this case as the standard land price of this case's appraisal report of this case's land of this case's land of this case's case was unlawful since the land price of this case was determined as the standard land price of this case's 2.

2. However, Article 29(1) of the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory provides that the Minister of Construction and Transportation shall survey and evaluate the land price in order to promote the proper maintenance of the land price and the promotion of land utilization, and shall announce it as the standard land price after obtaining confirmation from the Central Land Expropriation Committee. In assessing the standard land price, Article 29(3) of the Act provides that the arm's length price of the reference land selected from among lands recognized as having similar natural and social conditions, as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, shall be examined and assessed. Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that a certain area of reference land shall be divided into several land categories by the unit of the area subject to the selection of standard land, divided by category into two different land categories, and then the standard land category shall not be determined separately by dividing the area subject to the selection of standard land into a zone subject to the selection of standard land into a zone subject to the determination of the standard land price into a zone subject to the determination of the standard land category by Article 29(5) of the Act.

Therefore, whether the above appraisal statement, etc., which served as the basis for the decision of this case, is legitimate to regard the reference land as the land of this case shall be determined on the basis of whether the above land is the reference land located within the area subject to the selection of the reference land identical to the land of this case and its category is the same, and it shall not be determined on the basis of whether the above land is located within the land of this case, such as the land of this case, although the court below judged that the above ( Address 2 omitted) ruling of this case was unlawful on the ground that it is not the reference land located within the rearrangement project district of this case, on the ground that it is not the reference land located within the said rearrangement project district of this case, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the reference land

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)