The meaning of "land price fluctuation rate of neighboring land" to be taken into account in calculating the amount of compensation for land to be expropriated.

Article 46 (2) of the former Land Expropriation Act (amended by Act No. 4483, Dec. 31, 1991) refers to the rate at which a Si/Gun/Gu land to be expropriated is located, barring special circumstances: Provided, That where there are special circumstances to deem that a Si/Gun land to which a land to be expropriated is located is changed due to the relevant project, the rate at which a Si/Gun land to be expropriated is located shall take into account the rate at which a Si/Gun land to be expropriated

Article 46 (2) of the former Land Expropriation Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Lee Gyeong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff 1 and two others, Attorneys Kim Chang-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Central Land Tribunal and one other Defendants (Attorney Lee Ba-ho, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu24276 delivered on November 18, 1992

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the Plaintiffs’ grounds of appeal.

Article 46 (2) of the former Land Expropriation Act (amended by Act No. 4120 of Apr. 1, 1989; Act No. 4483 of Dec. 31, 1991) provides that "the compensation for land shall be based on the officially announced land price under the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Lands, etc. Act, and the compensation for land shall be based on the price assessed in consideration of the land use plan under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes or the rate of increase in the prices of neighboring land unrelated to the relevant area from the basic date until the basic date of adjudication, or other matters." The "land price fluctuation rate" here shows that the normal land price of the land to be expropriated can best be reflected in the geographical or socioeconomic aspect of the Gu/Si/Gun region where the land to be expropriated is located, barring special circumstances. However, if there is a change in the land price of the Gu/Si/Gun region where the land to be expropriated is located, it shall not be considered that there is a change in the land price of the Gu/Si/Gun region where the land to be expropriated.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the ratio of increase in the land price of the production green area in Bupyeong-si where the land to be expropriated in this case is located during the period from January 1, 1990, which is the basic date of the officially announced land price applicable in this case, to October 26 of the same year, which is the date of the expropriation ruling, was 28.18%, and the land price increase rate was affected by the housing site development project in this case, while the land price increase rate was not affected by the land development project in this case, but it was 21% on average of the land price increase rate of the production green area in seven areas, such as the North-gu, South-dong, Si, Si, Si, Si, Si, Si, Yyeong-si, Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Yangcheon-gu, Gangseo-gu, and Gangseo-gu, which is the basic date of the officially announced land price announced in this case, and therefore, the land price increase rate to be considered in the calculation of compensation for losses in this case is just, and there is no reason to conclude that it erred.

Therefore, all appeals are 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 Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)