1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,714,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 25, 2013 to June 11, 2015.

1. The date of commencement of expropriation of 1,027,421,70 square meters in the aggregate of 275,249,700 square meters and 1,027,027,421,70 square meters before D on May 24, 2014, the date of the adjudication by the Central Land Expropriation Tribunal of the Korea Land Expropriation and Adjudication Agency on May 23, 2013 on the purport of the adjudication on expropriation of the summary of the adjudication on expropriation on May 23, 2013;

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the pertinent land subject to expropriation is a reasonable amount of compensation by the court appraiser, and sought payment of the remaining amount derived from deducting the amount of appraisal by the appraisal authority of the said amount from the said amount. Accordingly, the Defendant only made abstract arguments that there is no illegality in the appraisal by the appraisal authority.

B. In a lawsuit as to an increase or decrease of compensation, each appraisal agency’s appraisal based on the objection to the judgment and each appraisal by the court’s appraiser do not have any illegality in the appraisal methods, and in consideration of the remaining price assessment factors except for the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to each other, in a case where there is a difference in the appraisal result (the appraised value of the land subject to expropriation) due to a somewhat different relation with the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent to the amount equivalent

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Nu14779 delivered on June 29, 1993, etc.). Each of the evidence mentioned above and the appraiser E of this Court.