1. The Defendant: KRW 87,335,95 to Plaintiff A; KRW 2,77,600 to Plaintiff B; KRW 103,007,740 to Plaintiff C; and KRW 149 to Plaintiff D.

The name of the project, such as the project approval and the announcement of the project approval: N in the notification of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on May 26, 2010, and the O in the notification of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on October 14, 2014: The land subject to expropriation by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “the same list”), and the owner of each of the said land, including each of the said land, is listed in the “owner” column in the annexed sheet No. 1.

The date of accepting the adjudication of expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on March 26, 2015: An appraisal corporation on May 19, 2015: the Korea Appraisal Corporation, the Korea Appraisal Corporation on the date of the appraisal corporation: the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation, the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation on October 22, 2015: The adjudication on compensation for losses by the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation, the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation, and the Alvia Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Objection Appraisal Corporation”): The compensation for losses by the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation: The same shall apply to the amount stated in the column for “the amount of objection” in attached Form 2 (hereinafter referred to as “the amount of objection”).

The amount of compensation (P) as a result of the appraisal by the court appraiser: The same shall apply to the amount indicated in the column for the court appraisal in the attached Table 2 (the amount which is the amount assessed by assuming and evaluating the status of the use of 442.6m2, 45.9m2, 459m2 among the land No. 1 of this case, 3m2, and 459m2 among the land No. 4-3 as the land for farming;

【In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2-1 through 11, Eul evidence No. 3, Eul evidence No. 4-1 through 11, Eul evidence No. 1-1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 2-1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 3-1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 4-1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 3-1 through 6, the court’s appraisal results on the appraiser P of this case as of July 1, 2016 and April 10, 2017, each entrustment of appraisal by the court as of April 10, 2017, the assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiffs’ assertion of judgment, the land No. 1 of this case No. 3 of this case was already cultivated as farmland before the introduction of the permission regulations on forest reclamation under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. From around that time, farmland was already reclaimed.