1. On October 2016, the Defendant stated the Plaintiffs’ “Difference” column in the attached list 3 as to each corresponding amount and each corresponding amount.

1. Case history

A. The Defendant is the Housing Redevelopment and Rearrangement Project Association which has obtained approval for the establishment of a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) from the head of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “the head of Yangcheon-gu”) for the purpose of implementing the housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”) by setting the size of 87,025 square meters in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the business area (hereinafter “instant

Plaintiff

The remaining plaintiffs except C, D, E, and F are the successors of net G (the deceased on January 5, 2017, hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) who owned real estate and obstacles described in No. 33 of the attached list No. 2 in the instant project zone, and owned real estate and obstacles in the same list No. 33 in the instant project zone.

B. On May 31, 2010, the Defendant obtained the approval of the project implementation plan for the instant project from the head of Yangcheon-gu Office, and the head of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government publicly announced it as H. on the same day.

C. After that, the plaintiffs and the deceased except the plaintiffs C, D, E, and F were subject to cash settlement because they failed to apply for parcelling-out within the period of application for parcelling-out.

As the Defendant did not enter into an agreement on compensation for each of the relevant real estate and obstacles listed in the separate sheet with the Plaintiffs, the Deceaseds, and the Deceaseds, other than Plaintiff C, D, E, and F, the Defendant filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City for adjudication of expropriation on August 26, 2016, and received the adjudication of expropriation on October 14, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant adjudication”) D.

Plaintiff

The rest of the plaintiffs and the deceased except C, D, E, and F filed an objection against the ruling of this case.

With respect to Plaintiff I on August 24, 2017, the Central Land Tribunal dismissed the objection on the ground that the amount of compensation prescribed in the instant adjudication against Plaintiff I is adequate (the amount stated in the “amount of objection” No. 10 of the attached Table 3 is the amount of compensation determined by the instant adjudication), Plaintiff J, K, L, and.