1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 34,625,00 for each of the Plaintiff A and B; (b) KRW 103,768,430 for the Plaintiff C; and (c) each of the above amounts on February 11, 2017 for each of the above amounts.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: D housing redevelopment and rearrangement project - Project implementer: Defendant - A public announcement of project approval: Notification E of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on August 16, 2013;

B. Decision of expropriation made on December 23, 2016 by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Metropolitan City - Plaintiff A subject to expropriation: The first floor of the building in Songpa-gu Seoul F No. 1 is a partitioned building, and the share of the site was assessed as a whole with the building.

The same shall apply to Plaintiff B.

Plaintiff C: 1/2 shares in the first floor in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F subparag. 1 (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned obstacles”): The Plaintiff’s 1/2 shares in the first floor (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned obstacles”): Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Gabro 137.5 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) and all obstacles, such as building on the ground (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned obstacles”): The starting date of expropriation: February 10, 2017 - The obstacles owned by Plaintiff A: 560,500,000 Plaintiff-owned obstacles: 560,50,000 Plaintiff-owned land: the land owned by Plaintiff C: 774,125,000 won: the land owned by Plaintiff C: 230,495,930 won.

C. Determination by the Central Land Expropriation on November 23, 2017 - With respect to the Plaintiff A’s obstacles to the ownership of the Plaintiff A: KRW 574,375,00: Land owned by Plaintiff C: KRW 574,375,00: KRW 79,562,50: KRW 235,030 (based on recognition): The fact that there is no dispute over KRW 235,027,030 (based on recognition); the entries in the evidence No. 4,5,7, 13, 14, and 16 and the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiffs’ respective land and obstacles owned by the Plaintiffs seek additional compensation corresponding to the difference between the reasonable amount of compensation according to the court’s appraisal result and the amount of compensation for the said judgment.

B. In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation 1, each appraisal and the court appraiser’s appraisal and assessment, which form the basis for the ruling, are considered in consideration of the factors other than the cost of goods, without any illegality, in the assessment methods.