1. The Defendant’s payment of each amount indicated in the separate sheet on the compensation statement for losses to the Plaintiffs, and the same on January 1, 2015.

1. Basic facts

(a) Outline of the project - Types of urban planning facility projects: Project name - Project implementer: AB published on April 11, 2012, and AC published on October 30, 2013;

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on November 20, 2014 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”): Land numbered and its ground obstacles indicated in the separate sheet of compensation for losses located in the Busan Jin-gu Busan Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “goods subject to expropriation”): Compensation for losses - The same shall apply as indicated in the separate sheet of compensation for losses.

- Commencement date of expropriation: January 13, 2015

The Central Land Tribunal rendered an objection on June 25, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant objection”): Plaintiff E - Details of the adjudication: The same shall apply to the statement in the “amount of the adjudication” column in the attached Table.

The result of this Court's entrustment of appraisal to AE (hereinafter referred to as "court appraisal") - Contents of appraisal: The same shall apply to the statement in the column of "amount of court appraisal" in the attached Form No. 1.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 7 (including a provisional number), Eul evidence 13 and 16, the result of the appraisal commission to the appraiser AE by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Inasmuch as the Plaintiffs’ assertion, the instant acceptance ruling and the instant compensation for losses as determined by the said ruling are considerably lower than the market price, the Plaintiffs seek an increase in the compensation price.

B. In a lawsuit concerning an increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there is an error in the content of the individual factor factor factor factor factor factor in a case where the appraisal by each appraisal agency and the court appraiser are not illegal in the appraisal method, and the remaining price assessment factor except for the individual factor factor factor factor factor factor, are consistent with each other, but only the individual factor factor factor factor factor factor factor difference in the appraisal result.