1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5,147,740; (b) KRW 742,760 to Plaintiff B; and (c) KRW 742,760 to each of the said money, from May 28, 2016 to November 2016.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project name: Public notice of project approval and public notice of C: The defendant; D3 project operator who is public notice of Gosung-gun as of November 5, 2014:

B. Persons subject to expropriation by the local Land Tribunal as of April 26, 2016: Plaintiff A 2294/2625 shares, Plaintiff B B 31/2625 shares, and Plaintiff B 331/2625 shares, and 935 square meters in Gyeong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) Compensation for losses: The date of expropriation of Plaintiff A 338,279,790 won, Plaintiff B 48,810,200 won: May 27, 2016: An appraisal corporation: Gado appraisal corporation and one appraisal corporation (hereinafter the above appraisers collectively referred to as “adjudication appraiser”; the amount of compensation calculated by taking an arithmetic mean of the results of the appraisal (hereinafter “adjudication”)

C. As a result of the instant court’s entrustment of appraisal by the appraiser F of this Court (hereinafter “court appraiser”), compensation for the instant land based on the result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal by the appraiser F of this Court (hereinafter “court appraisal”) is KRW 343,427,530, and Plaintiff B is KRW 49,52,960.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 5, the result of the commission of appraisal to appraiser F by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Since the compensation determined by the adjudication of expropriation for the land of this case for which the plaintiffs' assertion was made falls short of a justifiable compensation, the defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the reasonable compensation and the compensation determined by the adjudication of expropriation to the plaintiff.

B. In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of compensation for expropriation as a result of an appraisal, in case where each appraisal and the appraisal by a court appraiser, which form the basis of the adjudication on expropriation, are not illegal in the assessment methods, and there is no other reason to believe that the appraisal is not illegal in the assessment methods, and there is a difference in the appraisal result due to a somewhat different relation with the comparison of goods, etc., one of them shall be the content of the relevant appraisal.