1. The defendant's "Difference" in the list to the plaintiffs (attached Form) refers to each of the money stated in the relevant list and its corresponding amount on March 1, 2017.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project name: Road project (E; hereinafter referred to as “instant project”);

2) Public announcement of project approval: F3 project operator announced by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on August 22, 2014: Defendant

B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Tribunal on January 5, 2017 (hereinafter “instant expropriation ruling”): Land listed in the list of the plaintiffs’ [attached Form] ownership (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) Compensation for losses: The date of commencement of expropriation as stated in the list of the compensation for losses (attached Form 3): The appraisal corporation on February 28, 2017: the dialogue appraisal corporation, the Korea Cmat appraisal corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal of expropriation”) and the Korea Cmat appraisal corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal of expropriation”).

C. On May 25, 2017, the Central Land Tribunal rendered an objection (hereinafter “instant objection”) 1: The “amount of appraisal of the objection” as indicated in the [attached Form] list shall be as indicated respectively. 2) An appraisal corporation: Sam Chang Chang and an appraisal corporation and the Central appraisal corporation (hereinafter “instant appraisal”)

D. 1) Results of appraiser G’s court appraisal: The appraised value of the instant land as of the date of the instant adjudication on expropriation: The appraised value of KRW 97,600,00 (attached Form 4 if divided according to the Plaintiff’s shares owned by him/her) is as indicated in the relevant item (hereinafter “court appraisal”).

[Judgment of the court below] The plaintiff's ground for recognition is without any dispute, Gap's evidence 1 to 4, Eul's evidence 1, 3, and 4 (including virtual number, the appraisal result of appraiser G, the whole purport of the pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The amount of compensation for losses for the land of this case, which is determined by the plaintiffs' assertion, is unfair because it considerably falls short of the market price of the above land. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiffs the difference in the amount of compensation for losses and damages for delay as determined by the court's appraisal.

B. The result of the adjudication and appraisal in the lawsuit on the increase or decrease of the compensation for expropriation 1.