(a) business recognition and public notice - B (hereinafter “instant project”) - C public notice given by the managing authority of the Daejeon Regional Land on July 6, 2016 - Project implementer: Defendant

B. The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on April 12, 2018 (hereinafter “adjudication on expropriation”) - The target of expropriation: The land owned by the Plaintiff in the instant project district, consisting of 354m2, E field and 13m2, E field and land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”) - Compensation for losses: 22,101,800 won of the instant land, 52,000 won of obstacles, and 52,00 won of the date of commencement of expropriation: June 7, 2018.

On October 25, 2018, the plaintiff of the Central Land Expropriation Committee filed an objection against the above expropriation ruling, but the Central Land Expropriation Committee filed an objection against the rejection of the plaintiff's objection.

(d)

The result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal (hereinafter “court appraisal”) of the land of this case was assessed as KRW 22,690,000 (the Plaintiff claimed for the increase of compensation only for the land of this case) as at the time of the ruling on expropriation of the land of this case (hereinafter “the court’s appraisal”). [Grounds for recognition] absence of dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the number), Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 8, and the result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal, the entire purport of the pleadings,

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Demanding the payment of the difference between the amount of compensation for losses and the amount of compensation for losses determined by the appraisal by the Plaintiff’s alleged appraiser.

B. In a lawsuit as to the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation on the market, each appraisal and each court appraiser’s appraisal and appraisal, which form the basis of the adjudication on expropriation, are not illegal in the appraisal methods, and are not illegal in the appraisal methods, and in consideration of the remaining factors except for comparisons such as goods, etc., in a case where the appraisal results are different in the comparison with goods, etc., but there is no evidence to prove that there is error in the comparison with the goods, etc. of any one appraisal and appraisal.