1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Factual basis

A. On November 12, 2003, the Defendant is a project implementer for C-Improvement Corporation, which was publicly notified as a road zone B by the Busan Regional Land Management Office, and the Plaintiff is the owner of 1,406 square meters of farmland D-si, which was incorporated into the said project district (hereinafter “instant forest”).

B. In order to not hold a consultation on compensation for losses with respect to the forest of this case, the Central Land Expropriation Committee, upon application for a ruling of expropriation, rendered a ruling of expropriation on October 19, 2004, the amount of compensation of KRW 17,082,90, and the date of commencement of expropriation on December 7, 2004.

The Central Land Tribunal rendered a ruling to change the amount of compensation to KRW 19,543,400 on February 22, 2005 on the objection raised by the plaintiff.

C. The plaintiff was dissatisfied with the ruling and filed a lawsuit for compensation as Busan District Court Decision 2005Guhap679, and the above court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff to pay 3,936,800 won, which is the difference between the amount of compensation and the amount of compensation at the time of the ruling on objection, and damages for delay.

The Plaintiff’s appeal (Supplementary High Court 2006Nu170) and appeal (Supreme Court 2007Du5561) against this judgment were all dismissed, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 11, 2007.

around May 12, 2005, the Defendant cut trees planted in the instant forest, and the Plaintiff received the amount cited in the said final judgment on June 1, 2007.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the forest of this case was afforested from around 1918 to about 425 weeks in accordance with the forest management plan submitted by the Plaintiff and his father to the competent authority. As such, the tree of this case should be admitted and compensated by preparing a goods protocol separately from the land protocol and undergoing an appraisal and assessment, despite having to proceed with the procedure of expropriation and compensation, the tree of this case through illegal procedures without preparing a goods protocol or undergoing an appraisal and assessment.