1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 213,281,641 as well as 20% per annum from May 20, 2015 to the date of full payment.

1. Details of confinement;

(a) Bogeumjari housing district development project (the fourth project): Public announcement of housing site development project and national rental housing complex development project (the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs No. 2008-566 on October 14, 2008) - Public announcement of project alteration: Change in the area of the planned area, the accommodation population, etc. (No. 2009-905 on October 1, 2009) - Public announcement of project conversion: Conversion into the Bogeumjari housing zone (No. 2010-273 on May 7, 2010): Defendant;

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation on June 22, 2012 - The date of commencement of expropriation: August 16, 2012 - Compensation KRW 330,050,000 for the items listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the title of this case”) owned by the Plaintiff

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on February 22, 2013 - The amount of compensation for the trees of this case increased to KRW 333,100,000 [Grounds for recognition] Gap’s evidence 1-1, Gap’s evidence 2, Eul’s evidence 1-1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to Article 75(1) of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects for the Plaintiff’s alleged public works (hereinafter “Public Works Act”), the trees of land expropriated for public works shall be compensated on the basis of transfer expenses or the price of the goods. According to Article 7 of the Rules on Appraisal and Evaluation, an appraisal shall be based on each object. Each appraisal in the adjudication of expropriation and its objection shall be based on an individual assessment for each object. Each appraisal in the adjudication of expropriation and its objection shall be assessed in a lump sum without an individual assessment of the value of the

Therefore, the amount of compensation for the trees of this case should be increased according to the appraiser B’s appraisal result (hereinafter “court appraiser B”) and appraiser B’s appraisal result (hereinafter “court appraiser”) calculated by evaluating the trees of this case separately.

B. According to Article 67(1) of the Defendant’s 1 Public Works Act, the compensation for the trees of this case as of the date of adjudication of expropriation.