1. The Defendant: 22,583,450 won to Plaintiff A; 9,581,250 won to Plaintiff B; 12,48,700 won to Plaintiff C; and 4,91 to Plaintiff D.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Outline of the project - Project name: A road project (E national highways construction 4j): A project operator: Defendant (competent: Busan Regional Land Management Office) - Public notice of determination of road zones (revision): F public notice by the Busan Regional Land Management Office on April 4, 2013;

B. Adjudication of expropriation by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on March 26, 2015 - Land subject to expropriation: Land of each parcel number indicated in the column for “subject to expropriation” in the attached list of compensation details in the Yongsan-gu, Changwon-si G: May 19, 2015.

The Central Land Tribunal's ruling on an objection made on August 20, 2015 - Contents of the adjudication: The details of the adjudication shall be as specified in the column for “the amount of the adjudication” in the attached Form 3.

The result of this Court’s entrustment to appraiser H of appraisal (hereinafter referred to as “court appraisal”) - Contents of appraisal: The details of appraisal shall be as stated in the column of “court appraisal amount” in the attached Form No. 1.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including additional number), the result of the above entrustment of appraisal, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In light of the fact that there was an error in the selection of comparative standard land, the compensation for losses determined by the plaintiffs' objection ruling was erroneous in calculating the gap rate of individual factors such as street conditions, access conditions and environmental conditions, etc., it was inappropriate to view that it was erroneous.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the difference between the amount of compensation based on the result of the court appraisal and the amount of compensation for objection, and damages for delay.

B. As long as there are several appraisal of the same fact in a lawsuit concerning the increase or decrease of compensation for determination, and there is no evidence to prove that any one of them is erroneous, the court’s adoption of any one of the appraisal belongs to the discretion of the court. The court’s adoption of a court’s appraisal that judged that any of the appraisal of the land, etc. subject to expropriation of the instant case was more appropriate and reasonable

Therefore, the defendant is subject to the court appraisal regarding the land to be expropriated.