1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 62,552,400 and KRW 20,000 among them, the Defendant shall start from March 17, 2018 to August 20, 2018.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval and public announcement - Business name: Construction of B-Oriented Road (hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Defendant - A public announcement of business approval: Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 13, 2017;

B. The adjudication of expropriation made on January 26, 2018 by the local Land Tribunal of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “D”) - The expropriation date: ① the Plaintiff’s ownership of KRW 49.7 square meters (hereinafter “D land”); ② the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-gi-2 square meters (hereinafter “E land”); ③ the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Fro 1.8 square meters (Provided, That the land category is different from the above land category, the actual use was deemed to be “road”; ④ The expropriation date was the date of expropriation (hereinafter “F land”); ④ the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-ground Building (hereinafter “E building”) (hereinafter “E building”):

(c) Adjudication by the Central Land Tribunal on July 19, 2018 - Compensation for losses (1): 251,233,500 won:

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the amount of compensation for objection against the land and E buildings owned by the Plaintiff cannot be deemed a reasonable amount of compensation. The court’s appraisal result (in cases of E buildings, separate court appraisal was conducted in the case of preservation of evidence in Seoul Administrative Court 2018da776; hereinafter in this case, the court’s appraisal result conducted in this case and the result of the court’s appraisal conducted in the case of preservation of evidence is collectively referred to as the “court appraisal result”) and the amount of compensation corresponding to the difference between the reasonable amount of compensation and the amount of compensation for objection.

In particular, in the case of F land, it is de facto in the expropriation ruling and its objection ruling.