1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and publication - Project name: Urban planning facility project (C project) - Notice D of Ulsan Metropolitan City on March 12, 2009;

(b) The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on December 8, 2016 - Land indicated on the attached real estate (hereinafter “instant land”): The date of commencement of expropriation - Compensation for losses on January 31, 2017: Plaintiff A373,469,000, Plaintiff B1,850,636,850 won

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on April 27, 2017 - Contents of the ruling: Each increase the amount of compensation for losses to Plaintiff A384,06,000 won, Plaintiff B 1,907,126,550 won, without any dispute, and the purport of the entire pleadings as follows: Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s evidence No. 2-1, 2, Eul’s evidence No. 2-1, 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Determination

A. Since the amount of compensation for losses to be assessed against the land of this case alleged by the plaintiffs is so small that it falls short of a reasonable amount of compensation, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs the amount calculated by adding 100,000 won to the difference between the reasonable amount of compensation according to each court appraisal and the amount of compensation for losses

B. 1) The appraisal of the land of this case based on the court appraisal (A) and the appraisal and the court appraisal of the Plaintiff B: 395,486,00 won (2: 1,97,832,800 won) based on the court appraisal and the appraisal of the land of this case (B: 1,97,832,800 won) are all comparative standards; the appraisal and assessment of the land of this case were calculated based on the comparison of regional factors and individual factors (C) as a whole with the overall view as to the comparison of regional factors and individual factors (in the comparison of individual factors, the court appraisal applied either the difference or lower of the appraisal and assessment in terms of the comparison of the individual factors), while the court appraisal and the court appraisal have applied the values of 3.872 through 3.8555 to the correction of other factors, compared to those applied the values of 4.04.

[Reasons for Recognition] 1 and 2 【Nos. 3-1 and 2, and the result of the commission of appraisal to the appraiser F of this Court;