Open Decision Ledger · Constitutional, administrative & state liability
Delivery claims against cash-settlement targets and the association's delay liability
Supreme Court, Sept. 3, 2020, 2018Du48922 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 청산금이자지급청구
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a redevelopment association obtained approval and publication of a management disposition plan, may it demand delivery of land or buildings from a former member who became a cash-settlement target, without negotiation or expropriation under the former Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act, and how is the association's liability for delay in paying the cash settlement sum within the 150-day period decided?
Holding
It may not. The approval and publication of the management disposition plan is not enough: to take delivery of the land or buildings from a cash-settlement target who is not a member, the association must go through negotiation or expropriation under the former Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act. Where a settlement is agreed, the duty to pay and the duty to deliver run concurrently unless special circumstances exist, and where expropriation is used, payment procedures come before delivery. Liability for delay in paying within the 150-day period is judged by comparing the moment the owner contributed the pre-existing asset with the moment the association actually paid.
Points at issue, verbatim
조합이 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제47조에서 정한 현금청산금 지급 이행기간(현금청산사유 발생 다음 날부터 150일) 내에 현금청산금을 지급하지 못한 경우, 그에 대하여 지체책임을 부담하는지 판단하는 방법
Unofficial English translation
The method of determining whether the association bears liability for delay in failing to pay the cash payment settlement amount within the period for performance of payment of the cash payment settlement amount (150 days from the day following the occurrence of the grounds for cash payment settlement) prescribed in Article 47 of the former Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
구 도시정비법 제47조에서 정한 현금청산금 지급 이행기간(현금청산사유 발생 다음 날부터 150일) 내에 현금청산금을 지급하지 못한 것에 대하여 지체책임을 부담하는지 여부는 토지 등 소유자의 종전자산 출자시점과 조합이 실제 현금청산금을 지급한 시점을 비교하여 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Whether liability for delay is borne for the failure to pay the cash payment settlement amount within the period for performance of payment of the cash payment settlement amount (150 days from the day following the occurrence of the grounds for cash payment settlement) prescribed in Article 47 of the former Urban Improvement Act must be determined by comparing the point in time at which the owner of the land, etc. contributed his or her pre-existing assets with the point in time at which the association actually paid the cash payment settlement amount.
Factors
- 재개발조합과 현금청산대상자 사이에 현금청산금에 관한 협의가 이루어진 경우 또는 수용절차에 의할 경우 현금청산금 지급과 토지 등 인도의 이행 순서
- 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법에 따른 협의 또는 수용절차를 거치지 않고 현금청산대상자를 상대로 토지 또는 건축물의 인도를 구할 수 있는지 여부(소극)
- 조합이 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제47조에서 정한 현금청산금 지급 이행기간(현금청산사유 발생 다음 날부터 150일) 내에 현금청산금을 지급하지 못한 경우
- 그에 대하여 지체책임을 부담하는지 판단하는 방법
Unofficial English translation
• The order of performance between the payment of the cash payment settlement amount and the delivery of land, etc., where consultation on the cash payment settlement amount takes place between the redevelopment association and the persons subject to cash payment settlement, or where the expropriation procedures are followed
• Whether a redevelopment association may seek the delivery of land or buildings from persons subject to cash payment settlement without undergoing the consultation or expropriation procedures under the former Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (negative)
• Where the association fails to pay the cash payment settlement amount within the period for performance of payment of the cash payment settlement amount (150 days from the day following the occurrence of the grounds for cash payment settlement) prescribed in Article 47 of the former Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments
• The method of determining whether it bears liability for delay in that regard
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2020. 7. 23. 선고 2019두46411 판결(공2020하, 1713)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2019Du46411 decided July 23, 2020 (Gong 2020 Ha, 1713)
Decisions referred to
[1][2] 대법원 2020. 7. 23. 선고 2018두47622 판결, 대법원 2020. 7. 23. 선고 2019두46411 판결(공2020하, 1713) / [1] 대법원 2011. 7. 28. 선고 2008다91364 판결(공2011하, 1717)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
If the expropriation award is deposited after the 150-day period expires but the owner also contributed the pre-existing asset before withdrawing, on what sum is the delayed interest calculated?
A later decision on when the interest obligation under the articles of association begins in a case where the pre-existing asset was contributed before withdrawal would require this entry to be read again. Any amendment to Article 73 of the Act or to Article 587 of the Civil Act would do the same.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “If the expropriation award is deposited after the 150-day period expires but the owner also contributed the pre-existing asset before withdrawing, on what sum is the delayed interest calculated?” vs Independent “When does delay liability begin if the owner delivers the property after leaving the association but before receiving the cash settlement?”
The primary asks which sum bears delay interest when the expropriation deposit comes after 150 days and the owner contributed before withdrawing, while the independent asks when delay liability begins if the property is delivered after withdrawal but before payment.
조합이 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제47조에서 정한 현금청산금 지급 이행기간(현금청산사유 발생 다음 날부터 150일) 내에 현금청산금을 지급하지 못한 경우, 그에 대하여 지체책임을 부담하는지 판단하는 방법Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul High Court, in its judgment of 30 May 2018 (2018Nu37160), dismissed the plaintiff's claim for delayed interest. It reasoned that the articles of association (Article 44(4) and (8)) applied only where a settlement agreement on cash payment had been reached between the association and the withdrawn member, and not where cash settlement was carried out through expropriation proceedings.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the passage stating the articles do not apply to expropriation proceedings was not appropriate. The plaintiff appeared to have continued to occupy the land after withdrawal on 23 March 2015 and only delivered it after the expropriation compensation was deposited on 11 August 2017, so the association bore no delay liability whatever the articles provided. It found the conclusion dismissing the claim sound, and no error of law affecting the result, so the Justices unanimously dismissed the appeal with the costs on the plaintiff.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the owner contributed the pre-existing asset before withdrawing from the association and then became a cash-settlement target, so that the interest obligation under the articles or Article 587 of the Civil Act can arise.
- A case in which a settlement agreement on the cash settlement sum was reached between the association and the cash-settlement target, since then the payment duty and the delivery duty stand in a relationship of concurrent performance unless special circumstances exist.
- A case in which the former owner delivered the land or buildings before the expropriation compensation was deposited, since the Court relied on delivery only after the deposit on 11 August 2017.
Record verification notes
Fix three dates on the file first: the day the cash-settlement reason arose, the day the owner last held the land, and the day the association actually paid or deposited the sum. Then read the articles of association relied on, here Article 44(4) and (8), against Article 47 of the former Urban and Resident Environment Maintenance Act (now Article 73) and Article 587 of the Civil Act, and check whether the expropriation award was made under the Act on the Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 재개발조합이 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법에 따른 협의 또는 수용절차를 거치지 않고 현금청산대상자를 상대로 토지 또는 건축물의 인도를 구할 수 있는지 여부(소극) / 재개발조합과 현금청산대상자 사이에 현금청산금에 관한 협의가 이루어진 경우 또는 수용절차에 의할 경우 현금청산금 지급과 토지 등 인도의 이행 순서 [2] 조합이 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법 제47조에서 정한 현금청산금 지급 이행기간(현금청산사유 발생 다음 날부터 150일) 내에 현금청산금을 지급하지 못한 경우, 그에 대하여 지체책임을 부담하는지 판단하는 방법
Unofficial English translation
[1] Whether a redevelopment association may seek the delivery of land or buildings from persons subject to cash payment settlement without undergoing the consultation or expropriation procedures under the former Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (negative) / The order of performance between the payment of the cash payment settlement amount and the delivery of land, etc., where consultation on the cash payment settlement amount takes place between the redevelopment association and the persons subject to cash payment settlement, or where the expropriation procedures are followed [2] The method of determining whether the association bears liability for delay in failing to pay the cash payment settlement amount within the period for performance of payment of the cash payment settlement amount (150 days from the day following the occurrence of the grounds for cash payment settlement) prescribed in Article 47 of the former Act on the Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Provisions referred to
[1] 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법(2012. 2. 1. 법률 제11293호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제38조(현행 제63조 참조), 제40조 제1항(현행 제65조 제1항 참조), 제47조(현행 제73조 참조), 제49조 제6항(현행 제81조 제1항 참조), 공익사업을 위한 토지 등의 취득 및 보상에 관한 법률 제62조 [2] 구 도시 및 주거환경정비법(2012. 2. 1. 법률 제11293호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제47조(현행 제73조 참조), 민법 제587조
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger