1. The defendant shall be 53,60,400 won to the plaintiff A, 13,878,000 won to the plaintiff C, and 6,717,000 won to the plaintiff D and each of the above amounts.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: National defense and military installations project (the first unit of the military unit project; hereinafter “instant project”): Public notice E of the Ministry of National Defense on July 12, 2013 - Project operator E of the Ministry of National Defense: the head of the Seoul Regional Construction and Management Administration under the defendant

(b) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation by April 21, 2016 - The expropriation object: F of Gyeonggicheon-gun, Gyeonggi-gun, and 14 lots (hereinafter “Gri-gun”) listed in the separate list owned by the Plaintiffs on the ground (hereinafter “instant item”): May 23, 2016: The date of expropriation commencement - Compensation for losses: Plaintiff A71,613,900 won: Plaintiff C9,492,000 won; Plaintiff D11,232,000 won - the appraisal corporation: the appraisal corporation; the appraisal corporation (hereinafter “appraisal”); the result of the appraisal (hereinafter “adjudication”) / [based] the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; the evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, 1, and 2 (including the number; hereinafter the same shall apply); the purport of the entire pleadings; and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' appraisal of the plaintiffs' assertion only sought an increase in compensation for the error among the trees of this case owned by the plaintiffs, but the amount of compensation for the whole trees of this case is calculated on the basis of compensation for losses, and the court appraiser also assessed the amount of compensation for the error among the trees of this case on the basis of the amount of compensation for the remaining trees as set out below. Thus, the appraisal of the whole trees of this case is calculated on the basis of the amount of compensation for the loss as set out in the appraisal. Thus, the appraisal of the whole trees of this case on the basis of the appraised value for the whole trees of this case on convenience.

Since it is unfair by evaluating excessively low compensation for losses, the defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the reasonable compensation amount and the plaintiffs.

(b) Attached Form 3 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

(c) fact of recognition 1.