1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Basic Facts

On March 18, 2015, the Defendant is the implementer of the disaster recovery project (D District Comprehensive Uniforms Project; hereinafter “instant project”) publicly announced by the Busan Metropolitan City captain-gun published on March 18, 2015, and the Plaintiff A is a person who operated a restaurant business within the Busan District EF resting area included in the instant project site, and Plaintiff B engaged in outdoor advertising business within the same resting area.

On August 24, 2015, the Busan Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of acceptance of the Plaintiff’s compensation amounting to KRW 19,05,000, and KRW 21,610,000 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of acceptance”) on August 24, 2015, on the grounds that there was no agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant on compensation for losses for the instant project. The Plaintiff was served with the certified copy of the instant adjudication of acceptance on August 31, 2015, and Plaintiff B on September 1, 2015.

On October 5, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an objection against the instant ruling of expropriation with the Central Land Expropriation Committee. However, on December 17, 2015, the Central Land Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling dismissing all of the Plaintiffs’ objections on the ground that they were unlawful, as the period for filing an objection was excessive.

On January 22, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit seeking an increase in compensation for losses arising from the instant project.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7, 17 through 25, Eul's statements in Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 7 through 12, and Article 83 (2) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor for the whole purport of the plaintiffs' lawsuits may raise an objection to the Central Land Expropriation Committee through the relevant local Land Expropriation Committee," while Article 83 (3) of the same Act provides that "any person who has an objection to the adjudication under Article 34 of the Local Land Expropriation Committee may raise an objection to the Central Land Expropriation Committee, through the relevant local Land Expropriation Committee."