1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,270,000 to Plaintiff I, as well as 5% per annum from December 20, 2013 to March 11, 2015, respectively.

1. Determination as to Plaintiff I’s claim

A. 1) project approval and public announcement 1) - project approval and public announcement - project name: Mpy iron private investment project (as of March 25, 201, N, etc. - project operator on March 25, 201: Defendant 2: The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on November 6, 2012: each obstacles listed in attached Form 2 (hereinafter “each obstacles in this case”) owned by Plaintiff I (hereinafter “each obstacles in this case”): The starting date of expropriation: December 17, 2012 - The method of calculating compensation (hereinafter “adjudication on expropriation”) by calculating the arithmetic mean of the values appraised by two appraisal corporations at the time of each appraisal (hereinafter “adjudication on expropriation”) and the amount appraised by each appraisal corporation at the time of each appraisal (hereinafter “appraisal on expropriation”) by the Central Land Expropriation Committee’s computation at the time of each appraisal; - the amount appraised by each appraisal corporation at the time of each appraisal (hereinafter “appraisal at the time of each appraisal; - the amount appraised by each appraisal corporation at the time of each appraisal;

(ii) [The facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Plaintiff I’s assertion and determination 1) The compensation following the Plaintiff I’s appraisal of each obstacles of this case on the grounds that the appraisal appraiser omitted the appraisal of some obstacles of this case, etc. is based on the appraisal based on the correct appraisal, and thus does not reach a reasonable amount of compensation. The appraiser of this court (hereinafter “court appraiser”) is the appraiser of this court.

(1) As to the result of the appraisal (hereinafter “court appraisal”)

(2) The Defendant should additionally pay the difference between the compensation according to the court’s appraisal and the compensation determined in the adjudication. (2) The evidence submitted by the judgment party, the court’s appraisal and the entire purport of oral arguments can be seen in full.