beta
Text
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s ratio of KRW 2,981,237 per month to the Defendant from January 26, 2017 to May 30, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff owned 821m2, D 58m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) and “3m2, 123.93m2 (child care centers), 161.38m2 (child care centers), 161.38m2 (child care centers), 3m2, and 84.72m2 (hereinafter “instant building”) from the instant building, while operating a child care center (129m29) with the ownership of the instant land and the instant building as “E” (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
B. On January 30, 2009, Cheongju-si designated and publicly announced an urban development project (hereinafter “instant project”) with respect to B, with respect to the area of 137,982 square meters (hereinafter “instant project site”) of the Heung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Friwon-gu, Cheongju-si, including the instant real estate.
After that, on April 12, 2013, the project development plan of the instant case (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport) and implementation plan (Public Notice H) were approved, and on December 21, 2016, the instant land substitution plan (urban Development and I) was approved, and on December 23, 2016, the public announcement was made and the public announcement was made for the designation of land reserved for replotting for the instant project.
Meanwhile, in the instant land substitution plan, the instant land was classified as monetary liquidation [the value of rights: Totaling KRW 715,497,000 [=69,217,000 [the value of KRW 16,280,000 [the value of KRW 821 square meters above]].
C. On December 23, 2016, which is the public announcement date of the foregoing public announcement date, the Defendant set and publicly announced to the landowner and interested parties within the instant project area the effective date of the designation of the land scheduled for replotting as of the 26th of the same month pursuant to Article 35(3) of the Urban Development Act, and commenced construction for the instant project from January 26, 2017 to the instant project site.
The Defendant did not reach an agreement with the Plaintiff on the compensation for obstacles to the instant building, etc. and business losses. As such, on December 5, 2017.