(a) Business Recognition and Public Notice - Industrial complex development project [Industrial Complex Development Project (D Tools)] (hereinafter “instant project”) - Public Notice E-project operator of Chungcheongnam-do on January 6, 2016 - Defendant

B. The ruling on expropriation on December 3, 2018 of the Local Land Expropriation Committee for Chungcheongnam-do: The object of expropriation - The Fran-si forest land 992 square meters in the instant project district owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”) - The starting date of expropriation: January 16, 2019.

On July 25, 2019, the adjudication of the Central Land Expropriation Committee filed an objection against the said adjudication of expropriation, and the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection against the said adjudication (hereinafter referred to as “the adjudication of this case”). The Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection to increase the compensation for losses to KRW 268,038,40 (hereinafter referred to as “the compensation for losses”).

(d)

The result of this Court’s entrustment of appraisal (hereinafter “court appraisal”) was assessed as KRW 297,470,500 on the instant land.

[Grounds for Recognition] deemed confession

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion may seek reimbursement of the difference between the amount of compensation for losses as a result of the appraisal by the court appraiser of the Plaintiff’s assertion and the amount of compensation for losses.

B. In a lawsuit as to the increase or decrease of compensation for expropriation on the market, in case where each appraisal and each appraisal and each court appraiser, which form the basis of the adjudication on expropriation, have no illegality in the method of appraisal and the remaining factors except for comparison with goods, etc., are identical with each other, but there is no evidence to prove that there is any error in the comparison with the goods, etc. of each appraisal, unless there is any evidence to prove that there is an error in the comparison with the goods, etc. of each appraisal, more trust of any one of the appraisal belongs to the discretion of the fact-finding court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Du25237, Oct. 9, 2008; 2008Du22129, Mar. 26, 2009).