1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 54,713,190; (b) KRW 55,473,450; and (c) KRW 55,47,450; and (b) KRW 54,717; and (c) KRW 55,450, respectively, to the Plaintiff A

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: C Housing redevelopment and rearrangement project - Project implementer: Defendant - Project approval: D public announcement of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on December 11, 2014;

B. Decision on expropriation made on January 20, 2017 by the local Land Tribunal of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) - Plaintiff B: Eunpyeong-gu E, 250.7 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) and all obstacles, such as above ground buildings, etc. (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned obstacles”): Plaintiff B: Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Fro 190.4 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) and all obstacles, such as above ground buildings, etc. (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”): Plaintiff A’s land owned by the Plaintiff for compensation for losses: 64,302,370 won: Plaintiff-owned land owned by Plaintiff B: 916,376,160 won: Plaintiff B-owned land: 80,413,460 won: An appraisal corporation and a new appraisal corporation of March 10, 2017.

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on December 21, 2017 - The land owned by Plaintiff A: 1,180,395,880 won for losses: 69,309,060 won for the land owned by Plaintiff B: KRW 960,130,080 for the land owned by Plaintiff B: KRW 84,138,190 for the land owned by Plaintiff B: An appraisal corporation: A certified land appraisal corporation, a land appraisal corporation, but a comparative standard for the land owned by all the above two appraisal corporations: The land comparison standard for each land owned by the Plaintiffs, and the land of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 252.2 square meters for the land owned by the Plaintiffs (other independent use: the land use status: the Class-II general use area, road traffic: the small-type general use area, and the road traffic: The purport of the entire pleadings and arguments is to be determined [based] the fact that there is no dispute, Gap, 2, and evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The amount of compensation for objection against each land and obstacles owned by the plaintiffs cannot be deemed a reasonable amount of compensation. It is added to the difference between a reasonable amount of compensation according to the court's appraisal result and the amount of compensation for objection.