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

(a) Project name 1) Public notice: The public notice of the river project (B Improvement Project) 2: the Defendant; the Gyeonggi-do public notice C on September 14, 2012 and the Gyeonggi-do public notice D3 project operator as of August 1, 2013:

B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on January 22, 2015: The land in question is deemed to be “the instant land” by combining each of the aforesaid land with the area of 42 square meters and 100 square meters prior to E in Nam-si, Namyang-si.

(2) Amount of compensation: 25,020,80 won in total: The land category on the public account of KRW 25,020,800 shall be classified as “former” or “the actual status of use”); the starting date of expropriation: The fact that no dispute exists over the ground of recognition on March 17, 2015; the purport of evidence A 1, 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since compensation for the land of this case as determined by the Plaintiff’s assertion acceptance ruling falls short of reasonable compensation for losses, the Defendant is liable to pay the difference between the reasonable compensation for losses of the land of this case and the compensation already paid to the Plaintiff as the owner.

B. Article 67(1) of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) provides that “The calculation of compensation shall be based on the price at the time of the adjudication of expropriation in the case of a ruling.” Article 25(1) of the same Act provides that no one shall change the form and quality of the publicly notified land that might hinder the project with respect to the publicly notified land after the public announcement of project approval.” Article 70(2) of the same Act provides that “The amount of compensation for the land shall be calculated by taking into account the actual use at the time of the price and the objective situation based on the general method of use, but shall not be taken into account such cases as temporary use, subjective value of landowners or persons concerned

The plaintiff asserts that the land category of this case should be evaluated and calculated as "the previous", which is the land category on the public register and the actual situation at the time of the adjudication of expropriation.

(b).