1. The Defendant: KRW 24,325,50 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from February 12, 2016 to December 22, 2016; and

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval and public notice - Business name: Gwangju City Urban Planning Facility Project (B district Urban Planning Road (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”) - Public notice of business approval: D public notice of Gwangju City on April 29, 2014, November 21, 2014 - Project operator: Defendant

B. Decision on expropriation made on February 16, 2015 by the Gyeonggi-do Local Land Tribunal on expropriation - The expropriation object: F land, G land, H land, I land, J land, and K land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) and 30 weeks of trees, 30 weeks of night trees, 30 weeks of night trees, 38, 70 won of local trees (hereinafter “land expropriated”): 966, 74,500 won of each of the instant land (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) - The expropriation commencement date: Gyeonggi-do Land Tribunal on April 2, 2015 (the Vice-Governor of the Appraisal Corporation and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Appraisal Corporation”) and the Appraisal Corporation on April 2, 2015.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on December 17, 2015 - Dismissal of an objection against the Plaintiff’s respective land of this case and the increase in compensation for losses for trees expropriated - An appraisal: An appraisal corporation new appraisal company, an appraisal appraisal company, and an appraisal appraisal company and a vice governor of the Gyeonggi-do Appraisal Board (hereinafter “appraisals”) in the Korea Appraisal Bank (hereinafter “Objection”) [based on recognition]] without dispute, and Gap’s evidence, Eul’s evidence, Eul’s evidence, and evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. For the following reasons, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the increased amount of compensation for losses on trees expropriated with each land of this case and the total amount of compensation for losses on trees omitted.

1. In comparing individual factors in the course of calculating compensation for losses with respect to each of the instant lands, examples of transactions in neighboring similar lands, examples of compensation, etc. are not appropriately reflected.