2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

(a) Project title (1) Project title: Project implementer for a redevelopment and rearrangement project for B housing: Defendant (3) on May 31, 2010;

B. Objects of expropriation (1) of the Seoul Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee on December 23, 2016: The Seoul Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Land Expropriation Committee without permission (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiff on the ground of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) within the project zone: The date of commencement of expropriation: 3,353,980 won (3): February 10, 2017; the fact that there is no dispute over the ground of recognition); the entries in Gap’s subparagraphs 1 through 4; and the purport

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion did not conduct an appraisal in determining compensation for losses by accepting the instant building, and the amount of compensation for losses calculated at the price of goods not in the transaction comparison method and the amount of compensation for losses is too low.

3. According to Article 33(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor, the price of a building shall be appraised by cost method: Provided, That in cases of a residential building, if the amount appraised by the transaction comparison method is larger than the amount appraised by the cost method, it shall be appraised by the transaction comparison method.

In the adjudication of expropriation of this case, it seems that the price of the building of this case is appraised by cost law. The court did not appraise the legitimate compensation for the building of this case, and otherwise, the compensation for losses in the adjudication of expropriation is inappropriate.

There is no evidence to prove that it has to be increased or increased.

The plaintiff's assertion seeking an increase in compensation for losses cannot be accepted.

4. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.