1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name B - Public notice: Ulsan Metropolitan City public notice C in May 8, 2014 - Project operator: the head of Ulsan Metropolitan City Dong-gu, Ulsan Metropolitan City;

(b) The adjudication of expropriation made on November 20, 2014 by the Ulsan Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee on the expropriation - The target of expropriation: Ulsan Metropolitan City Land Expropriation 2,304 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and obstacles owned by the Plaintiff - The starting date of expropriation: January 14, 2015 - The amount of compensation: 442,252,80 won (the subject land shall be omitted; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the instant land;

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on March 24, 2016 - Amount of compensation: 474,393,600 won (based on recognition) of the instant land; the fact that there is no dispute over the instant land; evidence Nos. 1 through 3; evidence Nos. 1 through 1, 3, 4, and 6; and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As a result of an error by the Plaintiff’s assertion acceptance ruling and its respective appraisal corporations in the utilization status, surrounding environment, operational status, compensation preference, actual market price of surrounding land, etc., and other factors assessment processes such as assessment of individual factors and factors such as the actual market price of surrounding land, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the difference between the compensation that is reasonably calculated and the compensation that is reasonably assessed to the Plaintiff.

B. 1) In a lawsuit concerning an increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and the court appraiser’s appraisal and assessment are not unlawful in the appraisal methods, and there are no other grounds for the remaining price assessment factors except for individual factors and vision. However, in a case where there is a difference in the appraisal of land subject to expropriation only with respect to individual factors and vision, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and assessment are adopted to accept any one of the appraisal and assessment as a legitimate compensation amount, insofar as there is no evidence to prove that there is an error in the individual factors and vision among them.