1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Business name: B Highway (six tools, referred to as “instant project”): Public notice: C-Project operator announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on April 4, 2012; Defendant

B. The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on November 20, 2014 and the expropriation of the instant land: The subject of expropriation: 2,114 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 1,653 square meters owned by Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, Seoul (hereinafter “instant land”). The date of commencement of expropriation: December 2

(1) On December 15, 2016, the Plaintiff requested compensation for agricultural loss compensation and response 1) to the Korea Appraisal Board (Korea Appraisal Board) to the Korea Appraisal Board (Korea Appraisal Board) and the instant land was leased by the Plaintiff, but the instant land was no longer usable for the farmer due to the instant project, while the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

(2) On December 22, 2016, the Korea Appraisal Board requested the payment of the farming compensation amount under the Farmland Act. (2) The instant land was assessed as a miscellaneous land that is a land category in the public register and compensated. Since it cannot be deemed a farmland under the Farmland Act, the said land cannot be deemed as a farmland under the Farmland Act, and thus, the said payment was not possible

(hereinafter referred to as "the reply of this case"). [Grounds for recognition] The entry of Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 1 through Eul evidence 4 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the lawsuit is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has leased the instant land from around 1998 to keep the land bean and a shoulder spawn in place. As such, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate for farming losses under the Land Compensation Act.

Nevertheless, since the Korea Appraisal Board delegated the defendant's compensation affairs refused the plaintiff's application for payment, the answer in this case should be revoked in an unlawful manner.

B. 1 The defendant is not subject to an administrative disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation or a lawsuit is filed with the lapse of the filing period.