1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Approval and public notice of a project - Name of a housing site development project (B housing site development zone - Public notice: Defendant: C public notice of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation on June 28, 2007, D, etc. announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on December 31, 2008 - Project operator:

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on May 23, 2013 - subject to expropriation: ① 13 square meters on E-road, ② 506 square meters prior to F, ③ 355 square meters prior to G, ④ 3,511 square meters of H, forest and field (hereinafter “instant land” in a lump sum) and ② Housing 2 above ground (hereinafter “instant obstacles”) - Compensation for losses: Total amounting to KRW 1,78,543,460 (i.e., the instant land ② KRW 304,159,200, KRW 304,300, KRW 152,36,00, KRW 195,261, KRW 750, KRW 132,660, KRW 1366,750, KRW 200, KRW 1366,000, KRW 136,616, etc.)

2. The plaintiff alleged and judged that the amount of compensation for each of the lands and obstacles of this case was excessively low in the appraisal which is the basis of the appraisal decision on expropriation, and sought an increase in compensation for losses. However, in a lawsuit claiming an increase in compensation for losses under Article 85(2) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation for Compensation therefor, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the amount of compensation is more reasonable than the amount of compensation stipulated in the adjudication on expropriation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu255, Nov. 28, 1997). There is no evidence to prove that the amount of compensation for losses exceeds the amount of compensation stipulated in the adjudication on expropriation in this case. Thus,

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.