1. The Defendant: 22,536,100 won to Plaintiff A and 5% per annum from May 23, 2015 to August 22, 2017; and

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: C Project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Public notice - Project operator D, etc. on November 9, 2011 - Project operator: Defendant

B. Adjudication on expropriation made on March 31, 2015 - Land subject to expropriation made on March 31, 2015: Land and obstacles listed in the separate sheet No. 1, which are owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “each of the instant land and the instant obstacles”). - The starting date of expropriation: May 22, 2015 - The term “adjudication on expropriation” in the separate sheet No. 2, as indicated in the separate sheet No. 2: Appraisal Corporation: the State Appraisal Corporation and the Korea Appraisal Board.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on August 20, 2015 - Contents of the ruling: as indicated in the column for “Objection” in the attached Table 2: - An appraisal corporation: the Korea Land Tribunal’s appraisal corporation and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Land Appraisal Corporation”) (hereinafter “Korea Land Appraisal Corporation”) and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Land Appraisal Corporation”) (hereinafter “Korea Land Appraisal Corporation”). In addition, the aforementioned appraisers are collectively referred to as “an appraiser”, and the result of the appraisal is referred to as “adjudication appraisal.”

D. The appraisal results of this Court - Expert E (hereinafter referred to as “court appraiser”) - The appraisal results for them are recorded in the “court appraisal” column in the attached Table 2.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 29 through 32, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 5 and 6 (including the number number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of this court’s commission of appraisal to appraiser E, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Attached Form 3 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

3. Issues and determination of the instant case

A. In full view of the arguments of the plaintiffs and the defendant, the issues of this case are as follows: ① whether each of the lands of this case was unfairly low, ② whether the obstacles were omitted, ③ whether the trees were unfairly low, ④ whether the relocation settlement funds, housing relocation expenses, and movable property transfer expenses were omitted, and in the case of the plaintiff Eul, the plaintiff A.