The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Basic Facts

In addition, the Plaintiff was the owner of C, C, D, E, and F land 1,713 square meters of five parcels of land, and Rose of Sharon trees (hereinafter “instant land and obstacles”), which are obstacles to the above ground.

The Busan Regional Land Management Office, which is the project implementer of the G Construction 12th (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”), consulted with the Plaintiff to purchase the instant land and obstacles, but did not come into existence. As such, it sought a ruling of expropriation from the Central Land Expropriation Committee.

On April 22, 2011, the Central Land Expropriation Committee rendered a decision to expropriate the instant land in KRW 135,877,170, and KRW 150,977,170, total amount of KRW 150,100 for the instant obstacles (hereinafter “instant adjudication on expropriation”).

On May 20, 201, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Central Land Expropriation Committee on May 20, 201, and did not receive the said compensation. On June 10, 2011, the Defendant deposited the said compensation money with the Changwon District Court (No. 536) No. 536 in 2011.

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1, 2, and 3 evidence, the plaintiff's assertion to the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the plaintiff's assertion to the purport of the whole pleadings. ① The appraisal result, which served as the basis for the adjudication of acceptance of this case, does not contain any indication of the height of Rose of Sharon. ② The Rose of Sharon was 5,000, and the cost of transfer per share was 395,290, and the compensation amount for the obstacles of this case should be increased to the amount stated in the purport of the claim.

In the case of a claim for increase of compensation for losses under Article 75-2 (2) of the former Land Expropriation Act, the burden of proving that the amount of compensation is more reasonable than the amount of compensation prescribed in the decision is the plaintiff.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Du1226, Oct. 15, 2004). Written evidence Nos. 2003Du1226, Oct. 15, 2004 (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Du1226, Oct. 15, 200) is just than compensation for the obstacles