1. The Defendant’s KRW 77,905,200 as well as 5% per annum from October 14, 2016 to November 20, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project name and public announcement 1) Project approval: Public announcement of project implementation authorization for a general industrial complex (C general industrial complex, 1j) and a general industrial complex development project (C general industrial complex, 2) in Si interest-si: The defendant; D ( October 29, 2013), Gyeonggi-do public notification E ( April 2, 2015), Gyeonggi-do public notificationF ( July 31, 2015), Gyeonggi-do public notification G ( July 4, 2016) 3:

B. Land subject to expropriation by the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal on August 29, 2016: Each land specified in attached Form 1 (hereinafter referred to as “each land of this case”).

(2) The date of commencement of expropriation: An appraisal corporation for the appraisal corporation and the Sam Chang Chang-si appraisal corporation for the compensation for losses as shown in attached Form 1: 4) the compensation for losses:

(c) Compensation for losses by the Central Land Tribunal on March 24, 2017: Each entry in the uniform appraisal corporation, dialogue appraisal corporation (based on recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion on the objection of this case is unlawful as follows. As so, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 95,651,50,00 calculated by subtracting the assessed value of the objection from KRW 1,177,405,70, the reasonable compensation amount of KRW 1,273,057,20.

① As an example of compensation for each of the instant lands, each land indicated in the attached Table 2’s “unselectedd compensation example and transaction example” was selected as a compensation example, but the other land was adequate as a compensation example.

② In calculating the gap rate, the appraisal of the instant case ought to be expressed to the second decimal place or to be rounded off to the third decimal place, but the appraisal of the instant case was determined to 0 or 5 to the second decimal place without any particular reason in the process of determining the correction of other factors, such as the attached Table 2 “the process of determining the correction of other factors.”

(3) The Enforcement Rule of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter referred to as the "Enforcement Rule of the Land Compensation Act") shall not examine the rationality compared with the prices, etc. claimed by other methods.