1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: housing site development (B) - Public announcement: The defendant;

(b) The adjudication of expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on October 13, 2016 - Land subject to expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on October 13, 2016 - Land of 92,90,400 won in total: 64,538,800 won in cases of land of 64,538,80 won in total: 28,451,60 won in cases of 28,451,60 won in total; the date of commencement of expropriation: December 6, 2016.

On February 1, 2017, the Plaintiff received deposit money of KRW 92,990,400 in total from the above compensation without reservation.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, Eul Nos. 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant lawsuit is unlawful, since the Plaintiff received the deposit money for expropriation without reservation.

B. If the land owner received without reservation any objection as stipulated in the adjudication of expropriation, it is reasonable to view that the land owner received compensation in accordance with the purport of the deposit by accepting the adjudication by the Land Tribunal. Therefore, the project operator’s obligation to pay compensation ceases to exist definitely.

Even if a landowner files an objection or files a lawsuit against the above adjudication, so long as he/she receives the deposit without expressing his/her intention of reservation, such as partial receipt of compensation during the lawsuit, it shall be deemed that he/she received the full amount of compensation in return for the purport of deposit by taking over the adjudication. Thus, the lawsuit that disputes the validity of the adjudication to expropriate is illegal as having no interest in the lawsuit.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Du1003 Decided November 13, 2001, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 82Nu197 Decided November 9, 1982, etc.). According to the above legal principles, according to the above evidence, the Defendant’s total sum of compensation for expropriation of the deposited person A and deposited money under Daegu District Court Decision 8513 Decided 2016, the Defendant was 92,90.