1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the statements (including serial numbers) and the whole purport of the pleadings as set forth in Gap evidence 1 to 14, evidence 18, Eul evidence 1, 11, 13, 14, 16 to 19, and 22.

On April 12, 2010, the Defendant publicly announced a compensation plan for the project for remodeling of DNA farmland in order to improve the agricultural environment and eliminate inundations of farmland by embling farmland in H river, dredging soil and creating farmland again. The Defendant announced the compensation plan for the project for remodeling of DNA farmland in which the project implementer is the Defendant.

On June 30, 2010, the Defendant obtained approval of an implementation plan with respect to D zones from the Standing Do Governor on June 30, 2010 to December 2, 2011.

B. The Plaintiff owns K 4,228.1 square meters, L 3,319.7 square meters, M 3,852 square meters, etc. (hereinafter “instant land”) at the time of residence located in the D District, and is residing at the time of residence, which is the location of the instant land.

C. On September 9, 2010, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a “request for consultation on compensation for losses for farmland remodeling projects in the D Zone” with the purport that “A total of KRW 40,673,30 of the amount of compensation, and KRW 40,673,30 of the amount of compensation, the owner, the Plaintiff, and the farmer (the recipient of compensation)”.

On September 27, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant stating that “N who has cultivated the instant land in the year 2009, died during cancer treatment, and his/her family members, including his/her children, do not engage in agriculture by moving to Gumisi in 2009, and even though the Plaintiff did not enter into a lease agreement with N, N reported as if it leased the instant land from March 1, 2009 to March 1, 2012, and registered it as the cultivator in the farmland ledger, so the Plaintiff would have paid the entire compensation to the Plaintiff.”

E. The Defendant, on October 4, 2010, shall hold a consultation with the Plaintiff, and even if the cultivator died, it shall hold a consultation with the Plaintiff (N) in the circumstances that took place after the public announcement of the compensation plan.