1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Business name 3 and 4 construction projects (hereinafter “instant project”): September 13, 2007 (Public Notice of the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy No. 2008-180, January 22, 2010, Ministry of Knowledge Economy Notice No. 2010-14, Nov. 24, 2010, Ministry of Knowledge Economy Notice No. 2010-214, Nov. 24, 2010) - Business operator: Defendant

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on August 20, 2015 (hereinafter “instant ruling of expropriation”): - On October 13, 2015, the date of expropriation: (a) the compensation for the losses of the B marine fishery workers suffering from the instant project; (b) some of the Plaintiff and the designated parties (hereinafter “persons eligible for compensation”) were recognized as eligible for compensation in the instant ruling of expropriation; (c) the designated parties was excluded from the compensation on the ground that the investigation was not complied with; (d) the designated parties, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, J, and K (hereinafter “designated persons ineligible for inspection”); (d) the designated parties, M, N,O, P, Q, and R (hereinafter “designated persons excluded from the compensation on the ground that they were not engaged in diving fishery as of the date of the announcement of the implementation plan on the instant project; and (e) the purport of the public notice of the first public notice of the first public notice of the agreement was excluded from the compensation for the reasons that they were excluded from the compensation.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) are those who had been engaged in sericultural fisheries at the sea of Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun prior to the project approval of the instant case.

The ruling of acceptance of the instant case was based on the short-term investigation of fishery damage for five months, and was premised on the capture of fishery products composed of the same ratio, disregarding the individual difference among sericultural fishermen, and the average catch per capita does not actually reach.