1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval and public notice - Business name: Construction of the Gu B parking lot (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”): Public notice: The defendant: Ulsan Metropolitan City M on March 12, 2009 and Jung-gu, Ulsan Metropolitan City on September 2, 2010, Ulsan Metropolitan City N N on October 28, 201, and Ulsan Metropolitan City N on September 8, 201 and Ulsan Metropolitan City N on September 8, 201;

B. The adjudication of expropriation on October 16, 2013 by the Regional Land Expropriation Committee of Ulsan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”): The area subject to expropriation: 612 square meters in Ulsan-gu D Miscellaneous land, E- 18 square meters in size (hereinafter “D land,” “E land,” and the combination thereof, referred to as “each of the instant lands”): Compensation for losses: D land 1,407,538,800 won, E land 40,570,200 won in total, and E land 40,570,200 won in total: December 10, 2013.

The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) dated 17, 2014 - Compensation for losses: D land 1,415,06,400 won, E land 40,791,600 won - An appraisal corporation: The Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “the appraisal of this case”) and one appraisal corporation (hereinafter “the appraisal of this case”) (hereinafter “the appraisal of this case”) did not have any dispute, and they did not have any dispute. The evidence Nos. 3, Nos. 1, 4, and 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In calculating other factors in assessing each of the lands of this case, the Plaintiff’s assertion of this case: (a) although the Plaintiff selected an example of sales rather than each of the lands of this case; and (b) assessed the compensation for losses of each of the lands of this case at a price considerably lower than the transaction price of similar similar lands; and (c) the Defendant is not obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 300 million, which is the difference between the reasonable compensation amount of each of the lands of this case and the compensation amount for losses as determined by the instant ruling.

B. The appraisal of an objection to recognition of the facts, and the result of a request for appraisal to the appraiser L by the court of first instance (hereinafter “appraisal by the court of first instance”).