1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,720,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from April 20, 2018 to October 24, 2019.

1. Basic facts

(a) Business approval and public notice - Business name: B development project - Public notice of implementation plan: September 29, 2008, Incheon Metropolitan City public notice of Incheon Metropolitan City - Project operator: The head of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City;

B. Adjudication on expropriation made on February 23, 2018 by the Incheon Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee - Subject to expropriation: 938 square meters prior to D, Seo-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “1”) owned by the Plaintiff, and 636 square meters prior to E (hereinafter “2 land”; hereinafter “each of the instant lands” in total, including land 1 and land 2) - Compensation for losses: KRW 89,442,000 (= KRW 54,978,000, KRW 2354,464,000) - Commencement date of expropriation: April 19, 2018.

As a result of the court appraisal - The appraisal result - The amount of KRW 955,162,00 (i.e., the land No. 584,374,000) / [based on recognition] Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1-1, the result of the commission of appraisal to F by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,720,00,00, which is the difference between the court's appraisal result as a legitimate compensation for each land of this case and the compensation for expropriation decision.

B. 1) In a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of land expropriation compensation as a result of a court appraisal, each appraisal and each court appraiser’s appraisal, which form the basis of the judgment, are in accord with each other’s view in view of the price factors other than goods and others’ price factors. However, in a case where there is no evidence to prove that there is an error in the content of a certain appraisal’s comparison with goods and others’ appraisal, insofar as there is no evidence to prove that there is an error in the content of a particular appraisal’s comparison, each appraisal belongs to the court’s discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du22129, Mar. 26, 2009). Meanwhile, in order to assess an amount of compensation for land expropriation, each appraisal and each appraisal’s appraisal based on the relevant laws and regulations, reflects all such factors by taking specific and comprehensive consideration of all calculation factors cited by the relevant laws and regulations, but they reflect them.