1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The defendant

A. Plaintiff A, as well as KRW 41,918,00, and KRW 29,747,590, respectively, to Plaintiff C.

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 12 to 3 6 pages of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. According to the appraisal and assessment conducted by this court upon the request of a certified public appraiserJ affiliated with a dialogue appraisal corporation as a result of the appraisal by this court, the appraised value of the land to be expropriated is as follows:

Plaintiff

The appraisal value of land subject to expropriation (units: 540,464,850 6/96 equity in 6/96 equity in 6/96 equity in 6/96,035,630 equity in 6/96,50,480 B 1H 1, and 1/96 equity in 1/96 equity in 90,005,0005,940 aggregate 91,083,420 C 1H 1,20 equity in 91,06,646,7202 I forests and fields 3,424,470 equity in 310,071,90 among 1/96 equity in 1/96 equity in 91,083,420 C 1H 1H forest and fields

3. The issues of the instant case and the determination thereof

A. The key issue of this case argues that the appraisal result of this court is more reliable than the appraisal result of this court's appraisal, and that the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiffs the amount of the claim calculated by subtracting the amount of compensation for the expropriation adjudication from the appraisal value of this court, while the defendant did not prove that there is an error in the appraisal of expropriation, and there is only difference between the appraisal result of this court's appraisal and the appraisal result of this court's appraisal, and therefore, the plaintiffs' claim should be dismissed according to the appraisal result.

Therefore, the issue of this case is whether the court should determine the compensation based on what appraisal result is the basis of the expropriation ruling and what appraisal result is the result of the court appraisal.

B. In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation in the relevant legal doctrine 1, each appraisal and the court appraiser’s appraisal and assessment, which form the basis for the determination, do not constitute an unlawful cause in the assessment methods, and there is no other price factors except for the amount of goods, etc.