1. The defendant shall enter the remainder of the plaintiffs except the plaintiff N on the "amount of increased compensation" in the attached Table 2.

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

A. The approval and publication of the project implementation plan - The name of the project: Q district housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case", and the project area is referred to as the "project in this case") - the defendant - the project implementation plan approval and publication: the defendant - the defendant - the defendant - the defendant - the defendant - the defendant - the defendant - the plaintiff 16 September 16, 2010 "the above "the project approval of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

A person shall be appointed.

(b) Decision on expropriation made on June 24, 2016 by the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City: The list of objects to expropriation shall be as specified in attached Table 1;

(hereinafter referred to as “the subject matter of expropriation in this case”, and the relevant land is specified by the sequence of the land, and the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Sdong is “Sdong.” Meanwhile, some of the plaintiffs accepted obstacles, but the above plaintiffs did not request the increase of compensation for obstacles, and thus does not include obstacles to the subject matter of expropriation in this case) - The date of commencement of expropriation: - The date of expropriation on August 12, 2016 - the compensation for expropriation is as shown in the corresponding part of the attached Table 2.

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on May 25, 2017 - The adjudication on an objection made by the Central Land Tribunal is as shown in the corresponding part of the attached Table 2 compensation for losses.

- An appraisal corporation: AT and the LOBA.

D. As a result of the court appraiser V’s appraisal, the court appraiser revised the appraisal report on November 22, 2017, and submitted the appraisal report on December 20, 2017, and thus deemed as the basis of the said modified appraisal report.

(2) The court appraiser (hereinafter the above appraiser’s “court appraiser” and the above appraisal result “court appraiser’s appraisal result”) selected each parcel of land indicated in the comparison standard table as a comparative standard and adjusted the timing and compared regional factors with the expropriation object of this case. The court appraiser corrected other factors based on the case case’s example on each parcel of land indicated in the following transaction case table, and calculated the appraised value of the expropriated object of this case.

-.