The Defendant stated in the attached Table 7’s “request amount” to the Plaintiffs on April 2019 as to each of the money and each of the said money as stated in the corresponding part.

1. Details of ruling;

A. As a project implementer of H New Construction Project (hereinafter “instant project”), the Defendant Mayor obtained authorization of an implementation plan for the instant project and publicly notified such authorization.

(I, 10 May 10, 2018, J, 13 December 2018).B.

The Plaintiffs are the owners of each corresponding land listed in the attached Table 1 attached hereto (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land,” and individually referred to as “instant land”) located within the zone where the instant project is implemented, and Plaintiffs A, B, F, and Plaintiff G are the owners of each corresponding obstacles listed in the attached Table 2 attached hereto (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant obstacles”).

Plaintiff

G had the place of business moved due to the execution of the project in this case while operating a dry water brokerage business on the ground of the land listed in the attached Table 3 before the date of the public announcement of the authorization of the project implementation plan in this case.

C. As the Defendant Mayor did not reach an agreement on the expropriation of the instant land and obstacles, he applied for the adjudication on expropriation of the instant land and obstacles.

On February 27, 2019, Jeonnam-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee: (a) determined the commencement date of expropriation on April 19, 2019; and (b) as indicated in the column for “the amount of adjudication of expropriation” in attached Tables 4 through 6, the Defendant Mayor rendered an adjudication to expropriate the instant land and obstacles (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”).

On October 24, 2019, the Central Land Tribunal filed an objection against the above ruling of acceptance. On October 24, 2019, the Central Land Tribunal increased the compensation for losses to Plaintiff E as stated in the “the amount of objection” column in attached Table 4, and made a ruling dismissing the objection against the rest of the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant ruling”).

E. The land of this case as a result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal (hereinafter “court appraisal”) is indicated in the “court appraisal amount” column in the attached Table 4, the obstacles of this case are indicated in the “court appraisal amount” column in the attached Table 5, and the business of Plaintiff G.