1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,608,300 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from January 3, 2018 to January 31, 2019, and the following.

1. Circumstances and results of appraisal of the ruling;

(a) Outline of the project: The project area in which B tourism resources are created: The defendant's announcement: D and E published on October 12, 2016, respectively;

(b) Objects subject to expropriation ruling by the Central Land Tribunal on November 9, 2017: F 59 square meters (specific use areas: natural green areas and utilization status; b. hereinafter referred to as “instant land”): 341,073,850 square meters compared to compensation on January 2, 2018: 26 square meters (specific use areas, natural green areas, and use status: Single houses) in Busan Seo-gu, Busan, which are owned by the Plaintiff;

(c) Compensation for losses by the Central Land Tribunal on May 24, 2018: 373,132,500 won;

D. On December 22, 2017, the Defendant’s deposit of KRW 341,073,850 (the difference between KRW 373,132,50,50, which was recognized by the ruling, and KRW 341,073,850, which was already deposited by the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch Office, as the principal deposit of KRW 341,073,850 on June 29, 2018, the Plaintiff was deposited as the principal deposit of KRW 32,058,650 (the difference between KRW 373,132,50, which was already deposited by the ruling and KRW 341,073,850).

(e) The base point of time for appraisal conducted by appraiser H (hereinafter “court appraisal”): The court appraisal conducted on November 9, 2017: The standard place of comparison of KRW 408,740,800 for compensation for the instant land: 368 square meters (specific use area: natural green area: site for the main building): The fact that there is no dispute over the ground of recognition / The Gap evidence 1-3, Eul evidence 1-13, and Eul evidence 1-13 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the court’s request for appraisal by appraiser H, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) As to the instant land, there are errors in the appraisal in the decision of expropriation and the court appraisal in the selection, etc. of comparative standard land, and the appraisal and the court appraisal in the said ruling are excessively low compared to the transaction cases of neighboring similar land or the publicly assessed individual land price. 2) The court appraisal is unreasonable.