The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 3

A. Article 77 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) provides that business losses incurred by the discontinuation or suspension of business shall be compensated in consideration of the business profits, transfer expenses of facilities, etc. (Paragraph (1) and matters concerning the detailed methods of calculating and assessing compensation amounts and the criteria for compensation shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport.

(4) Article 46 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport No. 131, Oct. 22, 2014; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act”) upon delegation provides for the assessment of losses incurred in the discontinuance of business and the cases falling under the “displacement of business” in each subparagraph of paragraph (2) of the same Article. Article 47 provides for the assessment of losses incurred in the suspension of business.

In full view of these provisions, the issue of whether business loss compensation is subject to compensation for closure under Article 46 of the Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act or compensation for suspension of work under Article 47 shall be determined depending on whether it falls under any of the subparagraphs of Article 46(2).

The provisions of each subparagraph of Article 46 (2) stipulate cases where it is impossible to move the relevant business to another place in the location of the place of business or in the neighboring Si/Gun/Gu. The determination of the possibility of such transfer shall be made by comprehensively taking into account whether there are causes for the relocation of the relevant business and the kinds and characteristics of the relevant business, the scale and characteristics of the business, the current status and characteristics of the adjacent areas, the efforts of the parties concerned to move to relocate, and whether

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Du7672 Decided September 8, 2006, etc.). B.

The lower court: