1. The part of the lawsuit in this case concerning the claim for purchase of the remaining land and the claim for compensation for depreciation shall be dismissed.

2...

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Business name: B railroad construction project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Defendant on May 1, 2009, the approval of the C project implementation plan announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on April 23, 2015, the D Public Notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on September 14, 2015, and E Public Notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs:

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on December 17, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant ruling of expropriation”): The land subject to expropriation: The Plaintiff’s Young-gun, Young-gun, 928 square meters in total, 74 square meters in total, 201 square meters in total, 112 square meters in G farm site, 14 square meters in J Sejong land (hereinafter “instant land”) and its ground obstacles (hereinafter “instant obstacles”): The amount indicated in attached Table 1 - The other amount indicated in the “adjudication of expropriation” column - The other amount of compensation following the suspension or closure of the livestock industry is not accepted - The other amount of compensation following the suspension or closure of the livestock industry is not treated if there is no consultation with the project operator, and thus a subsequent application for expropriation is made. The appraisal is not to be considered on February 1, 2016: K Co., Ltd. and L Co. (hereinafter “adjudication of expropriation”): The date of expropriation.

The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on October 27, 2016 (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) - Compensation for losses: The amount indicated in the column for “compensation for losses” as indicated in the attached Table 1: The content of other rulings - The claims for compensation for losses incurred by the suspension or closure of the livestock industry and the claims for compensation for the amount of salary-salvatorys are not accepted. The claims for purchase of the remaining land and compensation for the depreciation of value were not discussed and resolved between the project implementer and the expropriation ruling, and there were no deliberations and rulings in the expropriation ruling. As such, the claims for compensation for the remaining land and the compensation for the depreciation of value were not deliberated and resolved with the project implementer after consultation with the project implementer, the appraisal will be dealt with and no separate determination is made.

D. As a result of the court’s appraisal, this Court’s appraiser (hereinafter “court appraiser”).