1. The Defendants shall be jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff A for KRW 27,646,30, and KRW 9,022,600 to the Plaintiff B, KRW 6,012,570 to the Plaintiff C, and the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - G - Public notice: H of Gyeonggi-do on September 25, 2015, public notice of Gwangju City on September 9, 2016, I, and public notice of Gwangju City on April 10, 2017 - Project implementer: Defendants

B. The ruling of expropriation by the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Tribunal on June 12, 2017 (hereinafter “instant expropriation ruling”): The same as the entry in the “land to be expropriated” in the attached Table owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “each of the instant land to be expropriated” in the attached Table owned by the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “each of the instant land to be expropriated”) - The starting date of expropriation: An appraisal corporation on July 27, 2017 - An appraisal corporation: the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation, the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation, and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Appraisal of Expropriation”) (hereinafter “Appraisal of Expropriation”).

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection (hereinafter “instant ruling”) dated April 26, 2018 - Contents of the ruling: The “amount of the ruling” in the attached Table attached to the Plaintiffs’ compensation for losses for expropriation shall be the same as the amount indicated respectively - An appraisal corporation: A new appraisal corporation, a vice governor, a Pacific appraisal corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal”) in the future, and a Pacific appraisal corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal”)

D. Results of the appraiser K’s appraisal (hereinafter “court appraiser”) - Contents of the appraisal as stated in the “court appraisal amount” column as stated in the attached table: The fact that there is no dispute [applicable grounds for recognition], Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including each number), the appraiser K’s appraisal results, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that each of the lands of this case as set forth in the adjudication of acceptance of each of the lands of this case and the adjudication of objection was unfair.

Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to pay the difference between the compensation for losses and the compensation for losses under the court appraisal and the compensation for losses under the instant judgment as just compensation to the Plaintiffs.

(b) relevant 1.