1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. As to Plaintiff I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, and R, the ruling of recommending reconciliation was finalized on January 17, 2017. A.

Project approval and public notice - Project name: F Housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter referred to as "project in this case"): Defendant - Project implementer: Public notice of project implementation authorization: G public notice of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 20, 201, and H public notice of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 2, 2014

B. Adjudication on expropriation made by the local Land Tribunal on February 27, 2015 - The date of expropriation: The date of expropriation: The land and obstacles indicated in the column for “real estate” in attached Table 1 attached hereto (hereinafter referred to as “land of this case,” and the above obstacles are referred to as “in this case”) - Compensation: In attached Table 1, “the result of appraisal of expropriation” shall be the same as each indicated in the attached Table 1. - An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation as a substitute appraiser for an appraisal corporation, and an appraisal corporation for a stock company:

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on March 24, 2016 - Compensation: In the attached Table 1 attached hereto, the phrase “as a result of appraisal” - The phrase “as a result of appraisal: A new appraisal corporation in the future of a stock company, a national appraisal corporation (based on recognition) and a national appraisal corporation (based on recognition), each entry in Gap’s evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul’s evidence 1, 7, 10, 15 through 18 (including the number of each branch number for those with a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As the Plaintiffs’ assertion, Article 30 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) applies not only to the amount of compensation for expropriation but also to the increased portion according to the court’s appraisal, the Defendant asserts that additional charges for the above increased portion should be additionally paid to the above Plaintiffs. The result of the instant ruling on objection against the Seoul Seodaemun-gu Seoul Seomun-gu, an obstacle owned by the Plaintiff C is the same as the result of the adjudication on expropriation, and the court’s appraisal is not made due to the loss of the building.