1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiffs the respective corresponding money and each of the above money by the Plaintiff stated in the attached Table 2’s Schedule.

1. Details of ruling;

A. Pursuant to Article 91 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the Defendant publicly announced the authorization of the implementation plan of “A”, which is an urban planning facility project on July 14, 2016 (Noon-gu Public Notice B), the authorization of the implementation plan on August 11, 2016 (Noon-gu Public Notice C), and the authorization of the modification of the implementation plan on July 6, 2017.

(Noon-gu Public Notice D). (b)

The Defendant filed an application for adjudication with the E Committee to acquire each relevant land or partitioned building (hereinafter referred to as “objects subject to expropriation of this case”) in attached Table 2, which is owned by the Plaintiffs necessary for the above urban planning facility project.

Accordingly, on December 22, 2017, the E Committee decided the commencement date of expropriation on January 31, 2018 with respect to the instant objects to be expropriated.

C. On September 20, 2018, the Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the above ruling of expropriation and filed an objection with the Central Land Expropriation Committee. On September 20, 2018, the Central Land Expropriation Committee rendered a ruling to change the amount of compensation for the Defendant’s acquisition of the instant goods to the amount indicated in the “price” column in attached Table 2.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant objection”). 【The grounds for recognition ] / [the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the provisional number), Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that compensation for losses under the decision on the objection of this case is considerably below the market price of the goods subject to expropriation of this case, and seek payment of compensation for losses and due compensation for losses due to the court's appraisal results.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that compensation for losses under the instant judgment is reasonable price calculated by taking an arithmetic mean of the appraised values by two appraisal corporations.

3. Determination

(a) In a lawsuit concerning an increase or decrease in land expropriation compensation, an objection shall be made;