1. The Defendant’s KRW 207,90 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from June 7, 2017 to November 22, 2017.

1. Basic facts

(a) Business name: A project name - Road project name (B) - A public announcement: A public announcement made on February 21, 2007; C of the Seoul Regional Land Management Office of National Land on January 7, 2014; E of the same public notification made on September 8, 2015; and the same notification made on March 14, 2016; the project implementer: the head of the Seoul Regional Construction Management Administration under the Defendant-.

(b) The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on April 13, 2017 - The subject of expropriation: 378 square meters of G forest land in Incheon-gun, Incheon-gun, Incheon-gun, Inc. (hereinafter “instant land”): 20,846,700 won: The date of commencement of expropriation: 20,846,700 won; - The ground for recognition / June 6, 2017 / The details of evidence Nos. 1, 10, and 11, and the purport of the entire pleadings, all of the arguments, owned by the Plaintiff.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the land category “forest” but is actually used as “previous,” so the Defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the amount of compensation for losses and the amount of compensation for losses as stipulated in the adjudication of expropriation based on the actual status of use.

B. As a matter of principle, the amount of compensation for the land whether this case’s land is “forest or forest” should be calculated according to the actual state of use. Thus, in order to calculate the amount of compensation due to the original state of use or the current state of use at the time of changing the form and quality of the land for the reason that the land to be expropriated is temporary or illegal change of the form and quality, the burden of proving that the land to be expropriated is the land to be altered

In addition, in order to recognize land subject to expropriation as illegal land changing form and quality, it is not sufficient to simply say that the form and quality of land subject to expropriation are different from that of public account books, and even if there was permission or duty to report under the relevant laws at the time of changing the form and quality of land subject to expropriation,