1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,475,150 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from February 12, 2016 to May 16, 2017.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and announcement 1) Project name: Defendant; C ( December 30, 2009), and D ( November 25, 2013) published by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs;

B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on December 17, 2015: The land indicated in the attached Table (hereinafter “E land”) and the F land “F” are all “each of the instant land”.

(2) The date of commencement of expropriation: Compensation for losses: The same shall apply to the description in the column for “adjudication of expropriation” in the attached Table No. 199, Feb. 3, 2016: the Korea Appraisal Board and one appraisal corporation.

C. Order of the Central Land Tribunal’s objection No. 1 on June 23, 2016: Attached Table No. 1, “the amount of objection” changed as compensation for losses as indicated in the column for “the amount of objection”: Large Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “the appraisal results of appraisal of expropriation by the said appraisal corporation”) and Sam Chang Chang Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the appraisal results of appraisal of expropriation”)

D. The result of this Court’s entrustment of appraisal to appraiser G (hereinafter “court appraisal”) is as follows: The compensation for losses is recorded in the “court appraisal amount” column in the annexed sheet.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 1-4, Gap evidence 2-1, 4-2, Eul evidence 1-4 (including each number), the result of the appraisal commission to appraiser G, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion of objection is assessed as “former,” which is a land category of 1,440 square meters among E land 1,580 square meters, and the remainder of 144 square meters (hereinafter “instant issues”).

The Enforcement Rule of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act”).

Article 26 (1) 2 of the same Act provides compensation for the calculation of compensation by deeming the same as the “de facto private road.” However, the key part of the instant case does not fall under the “de facto private road” under the same Enforcement Rule, thereby evaluating the amount of compensation as the “former”,