1. The Defendant’s KRW 12,041,634 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from October 19, 2016 to December 20, 2017.

The name of the project, such as project approval and public announcement of the project: The road project [B] public announcement: (a) announced by the Seoul Regional Land Management Office on April 29, 2009; and (b) announced by the Seoul Regional Land Management Office on May 1, 2012: The owner of the land subject to expropriation at the time of expropriation of shares 6,612/19,312 (hereinafter “instant land”): The land subject to expropriation: The land owner at the time of expropriation of shares 6,612/19,312 (hereinafter “instant land”): The expropriation ruling dated August 25, 2016 and the date of expropriation of the objection on February 23, 2017: The public announcement of the Seoul Regional Land Management Agency on April 29, 200; (b) the public announcement of the appraisal price of the instant land; (c) the appraisal price of the relevant land; (d) the appraisal price of the land at the court at the time of expropriation; (d) the appraisal price at the court at the court at the rate of KRW 371, 7.

Therefore, compensation for each land of this case should be increased to the court appraisal amount, which is the amount duly assessed.

Judgment

Since the appraisal of the criteria for the calculation of compensation for losses requires special knowledge and experience in order to determine certain matters, it is nothing more than using such knowledge or experience as a supplementary means for the determination. Therefore, there are several different appraisals in conflict with the same facts in the lawsuit on the increase or decrease of compensation, and there is no evidence to recognize that there is an error in any one of them.