1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. On February 13, 2007, the Defendant asserted that the cause of the claim occurred and agreed on each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) as divided in the real estate 1,150 square meters (hereinafter “the real estate before subdivision”) from the network H (hereinafter “the network”) under the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

Article 91 (1) of the Land Compensation Act provides that where all or part of the acquired land becomes unnecessary due to the discontinuation or alteration of the relevant project or for other reasons within 10 years from the date of acquisition through consultation or expropriation of the land, the landowner or his/her general successor at the time of the acquisition date may repurchase the land by paying to the project operator the amount equivalent to the compensation paid for such land, within one year from the date when all or part of the acquired land becomes unnecessary, or within 10 years from the date

However, the Defendant did not implement the project with the purpose of urban planning after acquiring each of the instant real estate, and currently, each of the instant real estate is being used as a garden, etc.

Therefore, it can be deemed that objective circumstances have occurred to view that the acquired land does not need to be provided for the public works, so the landowner or his general successor at the time of the acquisition date can exercise the right of repurchase.

The Deceased died on July 10, 2008, and inherited the Deceased at the ratio of Plaintiff A1.5/7.5’s shares and the remaining Plaintiffs’ shares 1/7.5’s shares.

The Plaintiffs deposited KRW 51,536,500 (No. 204 of Jeju District Court Decision 2017) in total equivalent to the amount of compensation for each real estate of this case as the deceased’s heir, and exercised the right of repurchase.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on each of the real estate of this case to the plaintiffs.