(a) Business approval and public announcement - Housing site development project: Housing site development project (place 4th of the main three districts): Public announcement: The defendant, as publicly notified by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on December 31, 2008; No. 2008-830; April 5, 2012; No. 2012-172; Dec. 24, 2012; No. 2012-929; and No. 2013-177, Apr. 29, 2013;

(b) The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation made on December 19, 2013 - Subject to expropriation: 480-13 square meters, 893 square meters, 480-14 forest land, 480-15 square meters, 79 square meters, 480-16 forest land, 9, 915 square meters, 1,64 square meters, 241 square meters, 114-2 forest land, 114-6 forest land, 14-6 forest land, 14-6 forest land, 1432 square meters, 114-8 forest land (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land”), and 32 square meters that interfered with the instant land clans, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “instant obstacles”): The date of expropriation shall interfere with the State’s appraisal corporation, 465, 686, 165 square meters, and 165 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “an appraisal corporation”) with respect to the instant land;

C. The court's entrustment of appraisal to A (hereinafter "the appraiser of the court," and the result of the appraisal is referred to as "court appraisal") - The appraisal value: 4,673,348,300 won with respect to the land of this case, and 633,385,560 won with respect to the obstacles of this case, there is no dispute, and Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and Eul evidence 2 (including each number), the result of the court's entrustment of appraisal to A, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Assertion and determination

A. Since compensation for the land and obstacles of this case as determined by the plaintiff's assertion acceptance ruling falls short of reasonable compensation for losses, the defendant shall pay the difference between reasonable compensation for the land and obstacles of this case and the compensation amount as determined by the expropriation ruling to the plaintiff.

B. There are several cases against the same facts in the litigation concerning the increase or decrease of 1 compensation.