1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,134,100 as well as 5% per annum from May 3, 2018 to April 10, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

A. Under Article 5 of the Electric Power Source Development Promotion Act, the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy approved the implementation plan for the “B project to secure the title to the New Power Transmission Cable,” which is the electric source development business implemented by the Defendant, and publicly notified on May 30, 2016.

(Public Notice of Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy).

In order to use 11-31m space on the ground of 1,01m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) out of 3,618m2 owned by the Plaintiff, the Defendant filed an application for adjudication with the Central Land Expropriation Committee, which is necessary for electric source development business.

Accordingly, on March 8, 2018, the Central Land Tribunal determined compensation for the Defendant’s actual permanent use of 11-31m space on the ground of the instant land at 50,651,100 won, the starting date of the use as of May 2, 2018, and the period of use as of the beginning date of the use as of May 2, 2018, and rendered a ruling of use by the beginning date of the use as of the facilities.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant decision on use”). The price (i) the multi-level utilization low-level (ii) unit price of the land of the appraisal corporation (ⅲ) x (ⅲ) x (ⅲ) 127,00 square meters E / 39.0% of the appraised value (ⅲ x 1,01 square meters) / 39,500 square meters / 500 square meters / 50,500 square meters / 39.0% of 130,500 square meters / 50,700 square meters / 51,700 square meters / 51,257,70 won / [based on recognition] / The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1,3, 5 (including additional numbers), Eul’s 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the compensation for losses under the use ruling of this case is calculated by evaluating the price of the land of this case remarkably low, and seek payment of the difference between the compensation for losses and the due compensation for losses arising from the court’s appraisal result.

B. The Defendant’s ruling on the use of this case’s assertion is the reasonable price assessed in consideration of the actual situation at the time of pricing.

3. Determination. (a)