1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the part cited in paragraph (2) below and the part concerning the plaintiffs’ assertion as to this case as stated in paragraph (3), and therefore, it is identical to the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with

2. On March 28, 2011, the name of the new city development project was changed to “AE new city development project” on the 5th part of the first instance judgment, the 5th part, the 7th part of the 5th part of the 7th part of the 5th judgment, the 9th part of the 9th part of the same 9th part.

‘including before and after the change of name’ refers to the instant development project.

In addition, from the 6th to 33th of the judgment of the first instance, each “a new city development project” is replaced by each “the instant development project.” The 6th of the judgment of the first instance is replaced by “a new city development project before the Z” as “the instant development project.”

Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deleted 5, 6 each week 9.

The "Land Compensation Act" in the 6th sentence, the 10th sentence, the 13th sentence, and the 26th sentence is replaced by the "Land Compensation Act" in the 6th sentence.

From Nos. 7 to 29 of the first instance judgment, each “AE New City Development Project” is replaced by each “instant development project.”

Part 8 of the judgment of the first instance is as follows: "The sale price in the preceding part of the first instance judgment shall be added to "by May 2015".

No. 25 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "No. 3 through 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance" is "former Public Works Act of October 17, 2007 (amended by Act No. 8665 of October 17, 2007" hereinafter).

According to Article 78, a project operator is replaced by “the State” due to the implementation of a public project. Section 27 of the first instance judgment, “the instant case” is deleted. Section 28 of the first instance judgment, “No. 1, No. 31, No. 16, and No. 41 of the first instance judgment, “the new city” is deleted.

In the first instance judgment, the sum of 29 pages 1 through 6 is the proportion of "area occupied by the basic facilities."