지장물에 대한 보상과 철거에 대한 법적 쟁점

Target ruling concession as a previous ruling without loss of compensation related to the corresponding aggregates of the previous ratio to exceed the acquisition cost despite determine the acquisition price as loss compensation for the competent land expropriation Commission accepts restructured to interfere water aggregates mothandago was determined to secure the formal ownership. But why the old restructured the land accommodate the Commission without the acceptance ruling is not clear. Perhaps the obstacle phase compensation practices is thought that the results did not deviate from the ideology of yijeonbi compensation principles. At the time this issue will also be a problem because Article 75 Paragraph 5 of the Land Compensation Act had no provisions.  But this case is seen that the land compensation laws and to promote the smooth implementation of public projects by securing ownership through a concession accept restructured, land expropriation Commission was right to accept the ruling on that obstacle.   Eventually land expropriation If the Commission accepts restructured for the obstacle concession that was not not gain ownership of that obstacle, the power to remove that obstacle has would not have been necessary to make some unreasonable interpretation .   Nevertheless, the conclusion would be subject made the right decision, which is the provisions of the Land Compensation Act due to systematic logic did not. The provisions relating to the future land compensation and how compensation for the demolition statutory obstacle is the need to re-repair.