A. 1) The Defendant is the project executor of the J Housing Redevelopment Project [the H Housing Redevelopment Development and Improvement Project; hereinafter “instant Project”) publicly notified as I publicly notified as of October 31, 2016 under the Act on the Maintenance of Urban and Residential Environments, pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions.

2) The Plaintiffs are owners of the pertinent land and its ground obstacles listed in the attached Table, incorporated into the instant project site (hereinafter “instant land and obstacles”).

B. The date of the ruling on expropriation of the instant land and obstacles (hereinafter “the instant ruling on expropriation”): The Gyeonggi-do Local Land Expropriation Committee 2): the date of commencement of expropriation: August 3, 2019: the date of commencement of expropriation: September 26, 2019; the amount of compensation for expropriation of the instant land and obstacles is indicated as follows.

(c)

The court's appraisal results (hereinafter referred to as "court appraisal") shall include L and obstacles 1,281,212,610 won 1,308,270 won ,600 won , and 1,185,344,940 won 1,221,583,360 won , and 368,071, 120 won ,375,927,875 won , D M and obstacles 1/2 of the appraisal results of the court's appraisal, 368,071, 120 won , 375,927,875 won , EN and obstacles 1,224,270 won , 361/2 of the shares of the court in question , 361/2 of the shares in GN and obstacles , 361/2 of the shares in question , 361/2 of the shares in the shares in question , 361/136/47 N and 47

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 7, and 9 through 10 (including each number), the result of the appraisal commission to the appraiser's office of this court, the result of the appraisal commission to the Suwon District Court 2020 Ah 3519, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the amount of compensation determined by the adjudication on acceptance of the case does not significantly reach the market price. Thus, the defendant is about the difference between the court's appraisal amount and the above compensation amount.