1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,388,400 as well as 5% per annum from June 11, 2014 to February 2, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business name: A public notice of project approval and public notice of project approval: The defendant; B3 project operator announced by the Ministry of National Defense on April 18, 2013;

B. Subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on April 17, 2014: The land subject to expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on April 17, 2014 (hereinafter “instant land”) shall be C, 1692 square meters in the original city.

(2) From the starting date of expropriation: Compensation for losses: 56,400,000 won: The Korea Appraisal Board and Scilar (hereinafter collectively referred to as “appraisal”) for losses: The result of the appraisal is referred to as “adjudications”;

C. (1) As a result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal: 63,788,400 won: appraiser: D (hereinafter the above appraiser is referred to as “court appraiser”; and the result of the appraisal is referred to as “court appraisal”).

D. On June 10, 2014, the Defendant deposited KRW 56,400,000 for the land in this case under the Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee, which was 575,00,000 for the land in this case’s KRW 56,40,000 as the depositee’s identity.

E. The Plaintiff’s lawsuit asserted that “the Plaintiff has occupied the instant land in peace and openly with the intent to own it for twenty (1970) years to twenty (20) years,” and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the confirmation of the holder of the right to receive the deposit money (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Da31632, Nov. 29, 2016). The said court rendered a judgment to confirm that the Plaintiff had the right to claim the payment of the deposit money, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 7, Eul Nos. 3 and 4, the result of an appraisal commission to appraiser D by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion and appraisal are erroneous by excessively lowering the amount of compensation for the instant land, the amount of compensation for the instant land should be increased according to the court’s appraisal.

(b) 1 expropriation compensation.