1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,955,950 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from April 3, 2015 to May 24, 2017.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval and public notice - Business name: Gwangju City Urban Planning Facility Project (B urban planning road (C and 13 routes); hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Defendant: D public notice of Gwangju City on April 29, 2014; and public notice E of Gwangju City on November 21, 2014;

(b) The Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation (hereinafter “adjudication of expropriation”) - Land listed in the attached list of real estate owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “each of the instant land”): 934,606,750 won - The date of commencement of expropriation: April 2, 2015 - The appraisal corporation and the Gyeonggi-do Land Tribunal’s business branch office for the appraisal corporation and the vice governor for the appraisal company.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of objection on December 17, 2015 (hereinafter “adjudication”) - Dismissal of an objection on the Plaintiff’s increase in compensation for losses - An appraisal corporation: an appraisal corporation which newly agreed to a dispute resolution, an appraisal corporation which an appraisal corporation and a vice governor of the Korea Appraisal and Assessment Board (hereinafter “appraisal”) in addition to an appraisal corporation and an appraisal corporation, and an appraisal appraiser’s appraisal results, collectively referred to as “adjudication appraisal”).

D. The fact that there is no dispute over the result of the appraisal commission to the appraiser F of this Court for the appraiser F of this Court (hereinafter the above appraiser is referred to as the "court appraiser, the result of the appraisal is referred to as the "court appraisal"), 970,562,70 won (which is the ground for recognition), Gap evidence 1-1 through 6, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 3, 4, the result of the appraisal commission to the appraiser F of this Court, the whole purport of the pleadings,

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion appraisal unfairly underassessment of compensation for losses of each land of this case, it sought the difference between the reasonable compensation for losses and the compensation for losses under the court’s appraisal and the compensation for losses incurred therefrom.

B. In a lawsuit concerning increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation, each appraisal that forms the basis for adjudication and each appraisal by a court appraiser shall be conducted on the method of assessment.