1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following judgments, thereby citing this as is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. As to the assertion that the selection of a standard for comparison was erroneous, the Plaintiffs asserted to the effect that, compared to each of the land in this case, the marks A, among the standard for comparison selected by the court appraiser, not only opened road conditions, accessibility, and utilization status, but also conflict with the urban planning facilities (public buildings: schools), the actual utilization status is different, and the preference B is not appropriate because the distance from each of the land in this case exceeds 3 km.

However, barring special circumstances, comparative standards shall give priority to specific use areas within an urban area; when there are several comparative standards for the same specific use area, the land category in the public record, surrounding environment, location, etc., the land identical or similar to the land subject to expropriation shall be selected as a comparative standard for the application of the relevant land, taking into account the characteristics of the land subject to expropriation such as actual utilization, land category in the public record, surrounding environment, location, etc. In addition, even if there are some differences between the standard land area and the specific use area of the land subject to appraisal and the surrounding environment, such differences can not be determined to have been taken into account

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da64627, Sept. 10, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 2009Du4340, Sept. 8, 201). As a result of an appraisal entrustment to appraiserR by the court of first instance, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as having comprehensively taken into account the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the appraisal entrustment to appraiserR by the court of first instance, namely, ① land, the specific use area of which is completed among the reference land in Jdong-dong, Gyeong-dong, is merely a symbol, and ② a symbolA’s land use or reference land survey and evaluation