1. The Defendant’s KRW 12,247,90 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 27, 2014 to August 19, 2015.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project approval and public notice - Private Investment Project (B City Expressway; hereinafter “instant project”): The defendant

B. Adjudication on expropriation made on October 27, 2014 by the Gyeonggi-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant land”): The expropriation object shall be calculated as KRW 480,095,010 based on the arithmetic average of the respective appraised values of the State appraisal corporations and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “appraisal”) - Compensation for losses on November 26, 2014 (hereinafter “Adjudication”) - Compensation for the instant obstacles to the instant land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant obstacles”) and the ground obstacles thereto (hereinafter “instant obstacles”): Compensation for losses: 480,095,010 won based on the arithmetic average of the respective appraised values of the instant land owned by the State appraisal corporations and the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Appraisal”) (i.e., compensation of KRW 421,206,660 for the instant land (hereinafter “instant obstacles”).

C. The Court’s entrustment of appraisal to appraiser E (hereinafter “court appraisal”): 492,343,00 won (i.e., compensation of KRW 433,780,00 for the instant obstacle items in the instant case): The fact that there is no dispute regarding the ground for recognition; (ii) the entry of Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1 (including the serial number); (iii) the result of the commission of appraisal to appraiser E; and (iv) the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the compensation determined by the expropriation ruling on the Plaintiff’s instant land and obstacles falls short of the reasonable compensation for losses, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the difference between the amount of compensation determined by the court appraisal and the expropriation ruling and the damages for delay.

B. In a lawsuit concerning an increase or decrease in land expropriation compensation 1, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and assessment based on each appraisal agency’s appraisal and appraisal based on each appraisal agency’s appraisal and appraisal and assessment methods do not constitute an unlawful cause, and individual factors and vision exist.