A. On July 4, 2013, the head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government publicly notified the approval of the implementation of a housing redevelopment and improvement project for a housing renewal promotion zone pursuant to Article 28 (4) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Residential Environments (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017) (B). (b) The Defendant, who is the project implementer of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Land Expropriation Committee, filed an application for the adjudication on each business (hereinafter “each business of this case”) described in the attached Table 2 of the Plaintiffs in the improvement zone, and on November 23, 2018, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Land Expropriation Committee set the commencement date of expropriation on January 11, 2019 (hereinafter “instant adjudication”).

(c)

The Plaintiffs filed an objection against the instant adjudication by the Central Land Expropriation Committee, and on October 24, 2019, the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection to the effect that the amount of compensation for losses of each of the instant businesses was changed to each of the corresponding money indicated in the column for the “amount of compensation for each of the instant businesses” in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter “the instant objection judgment”).

[Grounds for recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) seek reimbursement of the difference between the compensation for losses caused by the Plaintiffs’ appraisal result by the court appraiser’s appraisal result and the compensation for losses determined by the instant judgment.

2) In light of the fact that the difference between the compensation for losses for each business of the instant case and the compensation for losses under the instant judgment based on the Defendant’s appraisal by the court appraiser, as a result of the Defendant’s appraisal, is a small amount of KRW 313,00 per each Plaintiff, it was proved that the compensation amount under the instant judgment is not unlawful.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case must be dismissed in entirety.

(b) 1) compensation.