(a) authorization and public notice of implementation - Urban planning facility project (parking lot) project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”); E public notice in the East Sea on August 30, 2013

B. The Gangwon-do Local Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on December 13, 2013 (hereinafter “instant ruling of expropriation”): The object of expropriation: Fluor 159 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), Plaintiff B, and C, owned 1/2 shares in the Dong-si, Dong-si, Dong-si, Dong-si, Seoul (hereinafter “instant land”) - The date of expropriation commencement: January 13, 2014 - Compensation for losses: ① The instant land 53,185,500 won; ② The instant land 30,224,250 won each of the instant land - No. 1/2 of the instant land - No. 1, and 2,50 won each of the instant land - The purport of the entire pleadings and arguments is as follows: (a) there is no dispute; (b) evidence No. 1, No. 2, and No. 8 (including additional numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply).

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. Each of the instant claims by the Plaintiffs was designated as a quasi-industrial area. However, the Defendant changed the specific use area to a natural green area for the direct purpose of the instant business.

Therefore, in calculating the compensation for losses for each land of this case, the defendant shall select the reference land corresponding to the industrial area pursuant to Article 23 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects as a comparative standard and calculate the compensation for losses. However, the defendant erred by selecting the reference land belonging to the natural green area as a comparative standard and calculating the compensation

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. (1) In fact, each of the instant lands is located around the entrance of breakwaters in the East Sea at the time of the East Sea, the surrounding area is a coastal commercial zone consisting of shopping districts, the low-rise size of which is used as a building site.

(2) Since the Defendant approved the basic urban planning on November 1, 1983, the basic urban planning was approved by the Defendant.