1. The Defendant’s KRW 12,088,80 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from December 13, 2017 to December 1, 2018.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Authorization and publication of project implementation - Project implementation authorization and publication - Project implementation authorization for a project for creating a nature learning place in B parks - Public announcement of the Ministry of Environment (date 29, 2017): The Minister of Environment;

B. The Central Land Tribunal on October 19, 2017

Adjudication on expropriation - Land to be expropriated: The land to be entered in the column for “land to be expropriated” in the attached Table (referring to the land located in Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong Dong, and only the lot number is entered) - Compensation for losses: The amount stated in the column for “adjudication on expropriation” in the attached Form: the date of commencement of expropriation - Compensation for losses on December 12, 2017 - Compensation for losses: 454,520,500 won

C. The Central Land Tribunal made an objection on May 24, 2018 (hereinafter “instant objection”): The content of the adjudication: (a) changing the Plaintiff’s compensation for losses to KRW 454,520,500; (b) the change of the Plaintiff’s compensation for losses to KRW 461,271,500; and (c) the amount indicated in the column for “the adjudication on compensation for losses” in the attached Table;

D. The result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal to appraiser E (hereinafter “court appraisal”) - Compensation for losses: is recorded as the result of the court’s appraisal in the annexed sheet.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3; Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 2 (including identification numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply); the court's entrustment of appraisal to appraiser E; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the reasonable compensation for the land to be expropriated by the Plaintiff’s assertion is identical to the result of the court’s appraisal, the Defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the court’s appraisal of the land to be expropriated and the compensation for objection to the Plaintiff.

B. In a lawsuit as to the increase or decrease of the 1st appraisal result, each appraisal and each court’s appraisal, which form the basis of the adjudication, have no illegality in the assessment method, and there is no other difference in the appraisal result due to the price-assessment factors other than the 1st appraisal method. However, in a lawsuit as to the increase or decrease of the 1 appraisal result, only the 1st appraisal is somewhat different from the 1st appraisal result.