1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant C, Defendant C, KRW 1,618,740, Defendant E, Defendant E, and Defendant F, KRW 3,197,828, respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

(a) The Korea Land and Housing Corporation, the Gyeonggi-do City and Pyeongtaek City Corporation are joint implementers of the Housing Site Development Project A (hereinafter “instant Project”).

B. The Plaintiff is a corporation established on March 6, 2013 for the purpose of agriculture, the production and sale of agricultural products, etc. in the land within the instant business area.

At the time of incorporation, the promoters are S, T, U, V, W, and the remainder of the promoters except S that retired from the representative director on April 3, 2013 are currently in office as the representative director (U), directors (V,W), and auditors (T) of the Plaintiff.

C. The Korea Land and Housing Corporation, etc. acquired land within the instant project area in sequence by means of an agreement or expropriation of land for public use from around 2009 to around 2011.

On March 29, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation on 1,372 lots, such as Pyeongtaek-si X 1,00 square meters, and 2,595,728 square meters in total, among 2,801,473 square meters in the instant business area, with the term of contract until December 31, 2013 from the date of entering into the contract, and the rent was KRW 238,806,980 (calculated as KRW 92 per 1 square meter).

E. On August 8, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation to return unregistered land 524 and 18 parcels of land among the subject matters of the instant lease agreement, and to change the leased object to the sum of 2,300,919 square meters in total (hereinafter “each leased farmland of this case”) of 954 parcels of land, and the rent to the sum of 2,300,919 square meters in total (hereinafter “each leased farmland of this case”), and to change the rent to 211,684,550 won in total (per 92 won in calculation).

(b) The Plaintiff cannot use or benefit from each leased farmland of this case for any purpose other than the purpose of cultivating crops (Article 2) and the third party, and the recipient of the compensation for agricultural loss who resides in the project area of this case wishes to cultivate the farmland he/she is entitled to preferentially cultivate, and the rent in this case shall be the same.