1. The Defendant’s KRW 14,123,200 as well as 5% per annum from February 2, 2019 to July 10, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) Name of the project that is the public announcement of the recognition of the project and the public announcement of the definition of the project: The defendant;

B. Land to be expropriated on December 14, 2018 by the Land Expropriation Committee on Gyeongbuk-do District: Compensation for adjudication on expropriation as specified in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant land”): 620,602,400 won starting: February 1, 2019.

on June 27, 2019 by the Central Land Expropriation Committee: 628,516,100 won;

D. The appraisal value of the instant land is KRW 642,639,300 as of the date of the adjudication of expropriation, as the result of the commission of appraisal to E by the court (hereinafter “the result of the court appraisal”).

【Unfounded grounds for recognition】 The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the court’s appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. As to the land of this case asserted by the Plaintiff, the compensation for losses recognized in the adjudication procedure is excessively low and unfair, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the compensation for losses indicated in the purport of the additional claim in addition to the compensation for losses recognized in the adjudication procedure.

B. 1) Determination 1) With respect to the appraisal result submitted by an appraiser under a commission of the court on the basis of professional knowledge and experience, if there are significant errors in the relevant process or if the other party does not submit objective data to impeachment its credibility, it shall not be readily rejected only by pointing out the possibility of minor errors that can be found in the appraisal process, etc. In addition, the appraisal result of an appraiser shall be respected unless there are obvious errors that the appraisal method, etc. is contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da67602, 67619, Jul. 9, 2009). Meanwhile, in a lawsuit on the increase or decrease of compensation for expropriation, the appraisal result and the court’s appraisal result are not unlawful and there are no grounds for its assessment method.