1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,187,50 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from April 25, 2013 to January 8, 2015, and the following.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Business name: Ulsan High-speed Railroad station area development project (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case") - Business authorization authorization for the project: No. 2008-60 on February 14, 2008

B. The ruling of expropriation made on February 28, 2013 by the Ulsan Metropolitan City Regional Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant expropriation ruling”): Ulsan-Gun B, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”): Compensation for losses: 1,573,939,300 square meters - The starting date of expropriation: April 24, 2013.

The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) on July 18, 2013 - Compensation for losses: KRW 186,093,30 (based on recognition): Facts that no dispute exists, Gap’s 2, 5, 6, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant land was already expropriated by the Korea Rail Network Authority on February 13, 2008, which was prior to the public announcement date of the project approval of this case, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed, so it does not belong to the subject matter of the public announcement of the project approval. Moreover, the said public announcement of the project approval becomes null and void as it did not file an application for adjudication within one year from the date of public announcement of the project approval pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”), and thus, the said public announcement of

B. Even if the project approval of this case is valid and the land of this case is included in the project of this case, the objection of this case and the court appraisal of this case shall be selected as a comparative standard without considering the above points although the land of this case should be actually used, its surrounding environment, location, utility value, etc. are identical or similar to the land of this case. ② The project approval of this case shall be transferred, not the date of expropriation or expropriation, while accepting the land of this case at the time when five years have elapsed from the project approval of this case.