1. The Defendant: 14,369,730 won to Plaintiff A; 16,178,430 won to Plaintiff B; 11,346,750 won to Plaintiff C; and 5,024 to Plaintiff D.

1. Basic facts

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Name of project: Kimpo-si Urban Development Project (I) - Public notice of project implementation authorization: Gyeonggi-do public notice of December 7, 2012 - Project implementer: Defendant;

B. The ruling of expropriation by the local Land Tribunal of Gyeonggi-do on June 12, 2017 - The subject matter of transfer or removal and compensation for losses: The “subject matter of transfer or removal” stated in the Plaintiffs’ “subject matter of transfer or removal” stated in the separate sheet “amount of adjudication on expropriation” and “amount of adjudication on expropriation” stated in the separate sheet - the starting date of transfer or removal: July 27, 201

Ruling of the Central Land Tribunal on January 25, 2018 - Compensation for losses: The amount indicated in the column for “amount of compensation for objection” in the attached Table.

(d) Court appraisal results - The amount stated in the “court appraisal result” column in the annexed sheet [based on recognition], as stated in subparagraphs 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the appraised value, which is the basis of the plaintiffs' claim judgment, is too low in the value of the obstacles to the transfer or removal of the plaintiffs' properties, the defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the reasonable amount of compensation of the obstacles and the amount of compensation of the ruling.

B. 1) Determination 1) In a lawsuit on the increase or decrease of compensation for losses adopted as a result of appraisal, where both the appraisal result and the court appraisal result, which form the basis of the adjudication, do not constitute an unlawful reason and there is no evidence to prove that there is any particular error in the appraisal result, whether to trust any one of the appraisal results belongs to the court’s discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Nu14779, Jun. 29, 193). This court shall adopt the court’s appraisal result that appears to properly reflects the formation of the value of the obstacles subject to transfer or removal due to the specific comparison between the obstacles subject to transfer or removal and similar transaction cases, etc.