1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On December 3, 2007, the Defendant publicly announced the construction of G road, which is the planning facility of the Seocheon-gun, as H on December 3, 2007, and on February 25, 2008, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation of the obstacles to the G-gun, Seocheon-gun, Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “Iri”), K land, and L ground.

On February 26, 2009, the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection to the increase in compensation for losses for obstacles.

(2) On December 3, 2007, the Defendant publicly announced the construction of MM roads, which are planned facilities of the Seocheon-gun, as H on December 3, 2007. On February 25, 2008, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling to expropriate N/O land owned by the Plaintiff.

On February 26, 2009, the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection against this. This ruling was made to increase the compensation for losses.

(3) On December 3, 2007, the Defendant publicly announced the construction of P Road Construction Works, which is the planning facility of the Seocheon-gun, as H on December 3, 2007. On February 25, 2008, the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal rendered a ruling of expropriation of Q obstacles owned by the Plaintiff on February 25, 2008.

On January 22, 2009, the Central Land Expropriation Committee made an objection to the increase in compensation for losses for obstacles.

(4) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming that the land and obstacles owned by the Plaintiff should be expropriated due to the construction of each of the above roads, and as a result, the Plaintiff was unable to operate the stock farm in reality, and thus, the compensation for the discontinuance of business should be granted (Korean District Court Decision 2009Guhap558). However, the judgment dismissing the claim was rendered.

The plaintiff appealed against this, but was dismissed.

B. (1) The Defendant is implementing a park development project, which is a Si-Gun planning facility of the Ycheon-gun (hereinafter “instant park project”).