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, etc. of ruling;

A. On February 23, 2010, the Plaintiff respectively acquired B forest No. 2,020 square meters and C forest No. 2,145 square meters in the public sale procedure. On February 1, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired 2/5 shares of D forest No. 30,149 square meters in the voluntary auction procedure. On August 23, 2012, around August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff divided B forest No. 609 square meters in the above B land, J 122 square meters and K forest No. 465 square meters in the above D land, and the said C forest No. 2,12 square meters in the above land.

B. Project approval and public notice 1): E Highway private investment project (hereinafter “instant project”).

(2) Project operator: project approval and publication date (approval and announcement date of implementation plan): March 19, 2010 (Public Notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs);

C. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on November 21, 2013: (a) the Plaintiff, located within the instant project area, owned by the Plaintiff, to be expropriated: (b) the share of 2/5 square meters in J 122 square meters in J 122 square meters in J. J. J. Do, ② the share of 2/5 square meters in K 465 square meters, ③ the share of 609 square meters in K 609 square meters in I forest, ④ the land of 2,112 square meters in L.

(2) The starting date of expropriation: the sum of compensation on January 14, 2014: 330,581,540 won (2/5 shares among J land: 4,601,840 won: 17,539,80 won for land: 57,428,700 won for land: 251,01,20 won for land use at the time of expropriation of each of the instant land: the evaluation criteria must be assessed to the same extent as the land classification entered in the record at the time of expropriation.

D. On January 9, 2014, the Defendant deposited KRW 330,581,540 in total of the compensation for each of the instant land by designating the deposited person as the Plaintiff according to the instant expropriation ruling.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 3 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The actual status of use at the time of the adjudication on expropriation of L land among each of the instant lands asserted by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”) is not a forest land category in the public register but a forest land category.

In addition, around July 1971, the key land of this case is designated as a development restriction zone.