1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) A project approval and public notice - Housing site development project (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case") - Housing site development planned district (hereinafter referred to as the "Seoul Metropolitan Government Housing Site Development Promotion District") - May 30, 2008 - Project operator No. 2008-187 announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on May

(b) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation on August 21, 2014 - Compensation subject to expropriation and compensation for expropriation: The compensation amounting to 198,549,600 square meters for the compensation amounting to 677 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) of Pyeongtaek-si, Sejong-do, Dakdong-ri, 581-1, and 198,549,600 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Plaintiff, and the compensation amounting to 360,280,000 square meters for the compensation amounting to 740-4, and 800 square meters (hereinafter “the amounting to 740-4 square meters in the Yellow-ri”), 58,829,600 won in total, - The date of commencement of expropriation: the Certified Land Appraisal Corporation, Samsung & Samsung Corporation, and the date of expropriation.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on May 21, 2015 - Details of the objection: 208,315,300 won for the instant land, and compensation of KRW 358,480,480,300 for the land at issue, and KRW 566,795,300 for the compensation of KRW 740-4, and KRW 566,795,00 for the land at issue, - An appraisal corporation: a national appraisal corporation in the country of a stock company, a stock company and an Alban appraisal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “appraisal,” and “appraisal”) [based on recognition]; the fact that there is no dispute over the appraisal result; evidence 1-2, evidence 2-1, 2-1, 3-2, evidence 1-2, evidence 1-1 through 4, evidence 2-1 through 2-4, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole, the purport of the pleading.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion is used as the site of the building along with the land at the 740-4 land at the Yaririririririri, the adjudication appraiser considered the current status of the use of the land at issue as “miscellaneous land and road” and unfairly underassessment the compensation for losses. The Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff the difference between the reasonable compensation for losses and the compensation for losses as determined by the adjudication and delay damages

B. The present land of this case, which is recognized, is Pyeongtaek-si.