1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 3,990,100 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from May 26, 2014 to July 15, 2015.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business name - Business name - Business name - Defendant - Business site - Business site - Defendant - Project site - Project site 2,762,620 square meters - Public notice of implementation authorization: E publicly notified by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on January 6, 2009, Daejeon Regional Land Management Office on October 7, 2009;

B. The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on November 21, 2013 (hereinafter “adjudication on expropriation”): The date of commencement of expropriation: January 14, 2014 - Compensation: - Compensation: In calculating the amount of KRW 117,154,400 (hereinafter “appraisal on expropriation”) based on the arithmetic average of the respective appraisal results of two appraisal business entities, - Compensation:

C. The Central Land Tribunal made an objection on April 17, 2014 (hereinafter “Objection”) - Compensation: Each description of the appraisal results of the appraisal corporation - the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation - the Korea Land Appraisal Corporation 19,137,400 won by taking an arithmetic mean of the appraisal results of the appraisal results of the relevant appraisal appraisal corporation and the dialogue appraisal corporation - (hereinafter “appraisal for an objection”): The fact that there is no dispute over the instant land [based on recognition]; the fact that there is no dispute over the instant land; the statement of the evidence Nos. 2, 3, 1, and 2 (including each number), and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. Whether to increase compensation for losses;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that compensation for losses for the instant land is considerably low compared to KRW 18,907,660, which is the compensation for the neighboring H, and is considerably low compared to KRW 18,90,660.

Although the appraisal of the objection was selected as a comparative standard site, the appraisal of the objection is inappropriate as a comparative standard site because the above land is a blind site.

In addition, the appraisal of objection was considered to have a road area of 241m2, but the actual road area is only 213m2.

Therefore, since the appraisal of the objection is calculated too low, it is necessary to increase the compensation to the plaintiff.

B. In fact, the land of this case 1 is based on the north side of the K Village located in the west-gunJ of west-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do and the East west-gun, East East west-do.