1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,034,250 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 19, 2017 to June 7, 2018.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business name: Railroad construction project (B) - Business name: Railroad construction project (10 vehicles in e.g., B) - Business site: Hongsung-gun, budget group, Sinsan-si, Sinsan-si and Pyeongsi, 3,403,658 square meters in e.g., Sinsi-si: Defendant - A public notice of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on December 22, 2014; and public notice of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on July 29, 2015

(b) The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on July 13, 2017 - The date of expropriation: Each land and divided superficies (hereinafter “instant land, etc.”) indicated in the column for “subject to expropriation” in the attached Table owned by the Plaintiff located in the instant project area: Compensation: The amount of KRW 307,808,150 as indicated in the attached Table “the result of the appraisal of expropriation” as indicated in the attached Table: An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation; one appraisal corporation; one appraisal corporation; another appraisal corporation; one stock company; one appraisal corporation; one appraisal corporation; one appraisal corporation; another appraisal corporation; one appraisal corporation; and another appraisal corporation; and one appraisal corporation for a stock

(c) Results of the appraisal by an appraiser E (hereinafter “court appraiser”) - Results of the court appraisal by the court: Attached Table 312,842,400 won as stated in the column for the court appraisal [the grounds for recognition] does not dispute, Gap evidence 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 through 3, the court appraisal results by the court appraiser, the whole purport of the pleadings, and the whole purport of the arguments.

2. The amount of compensation determined by the adjudication on expropriation of the Plaintiff’s land, etc. in this case is too low and unfair. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the difference between the amount of compensation determined by the adjudication on expropriation in the appraised value according to the court’s appraisal result and damages for delay

3. In the lawsuit on the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation, each appraisal that forms the basis of adjudication and each court appraiser’s appraisal is not illegal in the assessment methods, and there is no ground for illegality in the assessment methods.