logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.08.21 2014누59483
손실보상금
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

(1) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff A KRW 57,149,143 and KRW 30,000,000.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is as follows: (a) except for the alteration of “a final and conclusive judgment of adjudication of disappearance” to “a final and conclusive judgment of adjudication of disappearance on March 17, 1966, theJ” into “a final and conclusive judgment of adjudication of disappearance” under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, thereby citing this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The F land of the plaintiffs' assertion was land under the circumstances of H, the fleet of which is the plaintiffs, and since it was incorporated into the river area of Yellow River, the defendant is obligated to pay compensation for losses equivalent to the shares of inheritance to the plaintiffs, the heir of H, pursuant to Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Compensation, etc. for Land Incorporated into the River (hereinafter "Special Measures Act").

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Determination 1) Whether the title holder and the plaintiffs’ preference H are the same person or not, and the name of the plaintiffs' preference D and H, which is the name of the situation of the F land, are identical to “M”, and the address of the title holder and the permanent domicile of the plaintiffs’ preference are identical. There is no data to presume that there was a name of the title holder having H in the vicinity of the address of D, which is the circumstance at the time of the preparation of the Land Investigation Board (each of the above evidence, the result of the first instance court's inquiry into the erroneous market, and the overall purport of oral argument). Therefore, since the title holder of F land should be deemed as the same person as H, the owner before the F land was incorporated into a river area, who succeeded to H in sequence as a national property, entered F land in the ledger prepared on December 12, 1979 as a river area under the former River Act (b) and its entire purport).

G in the vicinity of F land was built in around 1958 to 1960, and 1,484 square meters among F land is made up of high-water sites, and 212 square meters in storage lots.

F. Before the River Act, 1971 enters into force.

arrow