1. The defendant shall pay KRW 90,270 to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs the business of processing steel plates, manufacturing steel structures, processing steel products, selling steel products, etc., and operated the business from June 10, 202 by leasing the Incheon Seo-gu Land Building from B on June 10, 2002, and then having operated the above place as its workplace from around that time.

B. Project approval and public notice 1) Project name: Defendant 3: The public notice of the housing site development project site development project (D) is publicly notified by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, E, February 6, 2009, the Central Land Expropriation Committee on January 21, 2016 (hereinafter “instant adjudication on expropriation”):

1) According to Article 47(6) of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter “Public Works Act”), the Plaintiff’s business was deemed as a business of the building without permission and determined as KRW 46,233,330.

2) On March 15, 2016, the date of commencement of expropriation: (d) the appraisal entrusted by the appraiserF of this court on the appraisal of the Plaintiff’s business loss compensation amount: KRW 46,323,60 (the calculation of KRW 10,000, the remainder of the expenses (excluding expenses for business suspension, fixed expenses, expenses, etc.) excluding the expenses for relocation of business facilities, etc. and the amount of depreciation in accordance with Article 47(6) of the Enforcement Rule of the Public Works Act) is 459,712,809, if the Plaintiff’s business loss is operated in an unauthorized building. The appraisal of the Plaintiff’s business loss compensation amount is 46,323,600 won (the calculation of KRW 10,000,00,000).

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Central Land Expropriation Committee calculated the Plaintiff’s business compensation amount pursuant to Article 47(6) of the Enforcement Rule of the Public Works Act on the premise that the Plaintiff’s business constituted “Lessee’s business in an unauthorized building” under the proviso of Article 45(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Public Works Act, but the Plaintiff’s business compensation amount falls under the Plaintiff’s business at a legitimate place. Thus, Article 47(6) of the Enforcement Rule