1. The Defendant’s KRW 154,197,725 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 15, 2016 to August 10, 2017, and the following.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) 1) Business approval and announcement 2: Defendant: D3 business operator publicly announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of October 24, 2008, and the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of July 29, 2009:

B. Objects to be expropriated by the Central Land Tribunal on April 21, 2016: Each item of the instant case in which “a tree among obstacles indicated in the separate sheet” is “each obstacle indicated in the separate sheet.”

2) The amount of compensation: 115,505,050 won (the amount of compensation for each item of this case among the entire amount of compensation is KRW 106,012,550): The Korea Appraisal Board, the Korea Appraisal Board, and the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter “Appraisal Board”), and the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter “Appraisal Board”), and the result of the appraisal is “the result of the appraisal of expropriation.”

(4) Commencement date of expropriation: June 14, 2016.

Compensation amount of the Central Land Tribunal’s compensation amount of November 24, 2016: 116,071,800 won (the compensation amount for each of the trees of this case among the entire compensation amount is KRW 106,579,300.

2) An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation and the central appraisal corporation (hereinafter “appraisal for an objection”) and the results of appraisal are “the result of appraisal by an objection” (hereinafter “the result of appraisal by an objection”).

D. As a result of the court’s appraisal, appraiser E (hereinafter “court appraiser”) ordered the appraisal of each of the items of this case from the court (hereinafter “court appraiser”) submitted to the court the appraisal result that the amount of compensation of each of the items of this case is KRW 260,77,025 (hereinafter “the court appraisal result”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2-1 to 3, and 7 through 11 of Eul evidence 2, the result of this court's commission of appraisal to appraiser E, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was omitted in the process of compensation, the amount of compensation calculated at a lower amount compared to the obstacles located in neighboring land, and the amount of reasonable compensation falls short of the amount of compensation. As such, the Defendant’s outcome of the court’s appraisal, which is the legitimate compensation for losses in each item of the instant case, is different