1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for admitting the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the plaintiffs in the court of first instance while appealed, and the judgment of the court of first instance that rejected the plaintiffs' assertion even if all the evidence submitted in the court of first instance are collected.

Therefore, the reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the following addition or modification and the addition of the Plaintiffs’ additional decision as to the assertion emphasized by the trial court. As such, this Court cited this as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(except for parts against the co-Plaintiffs in the first instance trial). 【Supplementary or modified portion】 From 8th to 13th of the judgment in the first instance court, the following modifications are made:

(7) The Korea Cultural Heritage Research Institute conducted the surface inspection of buried cultural heritage from June 28, 2010 to March 2, 2011, and submitted the result thereof to the Cultural Heritage Committee on June 24, 2011. Accordingly, the Korea Cultural Heritage Committee notified the result of deliberation (re-application after the determination of route design, etc.) on June 24, 201. Accordingly, as the Korea Cultural Heritage Corporation became final and conclusive on June 2012, the Korea Cultural Heritage Foundation conducted the second ground surface inspection from November 6, 2012 to July 5, 2013. The Korea Cultural Heritage Corporation submitted the result of the ground surface inspection of the Korea Cultural Heritage Research Institute to the Administrator of Cultural Heritage Administration on December 27, 2013 pursuant to Article 8 of the Act on the Protection and Inspection of Buried Cultural Heritage.

“The 15th 15th 15th 15th 15th 15th 9th 15th 1st 1st 2th 2th 2th 2th 3th 3th 3th 2

The 11th to 19th of the decision of the first instance shall be amended as follows:

The Act on Protection and Inspection of Buried Cultural Heritage violates the procedure stipulated in the E.S. Act.