1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of ruling;

A. The Defendant is the project implementer of the project for reserving the site for the road project between B and C in the jurisdiction of the Gyeonggi-do, and the Gyeonggi-do Governor, on April 16, 2007, pursuant to Article 24 of the Road Act, determined the area of the road for the project of this case as notified D by the 2nd Office of Gyeonggi-do on September 9, 2010 and notified E by the 2nd Office of Gyeonggi-do on September 9, 2010, and the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs approved the project of this case as F publicly notified by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on December 2010 pursuant to Articles 14 and 15 of the Act

B. The Plaintiff is the owner of obstacles, such as plastic houses, warehouses, etc. on the G ground at the time of strike, and the Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on November 19, 2012 provided compensation for obstacles to the Plaintiff’s possession. However, at the time of the investigation for the adjudication on expropriation, 340 punishments owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant punishments”) were not included in the assessment of compensation for losses.

C. Since then, it was confirmed that the instant punishment was omitted from the subject of compensation. On April 23, 2015, the Central Land Tribunal rendered an objection against the instant punishment amounting to KRW 1,400,000, based on the arithmetic mean of the respective appraisal results of appraisal by an appraisal corporation (Na, Sejong).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5 through 10, Eul evidence 1, 2 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since it is impossible to transfer the Plaintiff’s assertion to another area, compensation should be made according to the acquisition value. Considering the market price of the punishment and the profit that the Plaintiff could have obtained from the two salary, the amount of compensation per punishment should be set at KRW 500,000, the appraisal of the judgment is unlawful by excessively lowering the amount of compensation.

(b) judgment public works;