1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 1,470,00 for Plaintiff A; and (b) KRW 140,00 for Plaintiff B; and (c) for each of them, from March 11, 2017 to October 10, 2018.

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) A. The approval and public notice of a project implementation plan - The name of the project: the CB promotion zone housing redevelopment improvement project (hereinafter referred to as the “project in this case”): Defendant - the project operator: The public notice of approval of a project implementation plan: D public notice of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (which was amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; which was enforced before February 9, 2018) under Article 40(2) of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017; hereinafter the above public notice is deemed project approval and public notice of project implementation; and the above public notice is deemed to have been

B. The adjudication of expropriation made on January 20, 2017 by the local Land Tribunal of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City: ① Business compensation (including relocation expenses compensation; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the provision of convenience stores in the trade name of “G” by the Plaintiff’s lease of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul E ground shopping mall F shop (hereinafter “first shop”); ② Plaintiff B leased the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul E ground shopping mall shop (hereinafter “second shop”) and indicated “I” as “J” in the annual number 218 of the appraisal report submitted as evidence No. 1-1, but the trade name is indicated as “I” in the written appraisal of business losses in Article 58 of the same appraisal report.

- Compensation for transfer expenses for the operation of restaurant business in the trade name of : - Compensation for transfer expenses for the operation of restaurant business [the plaintiff B shall be compensated for losses caused by the suspension of I business, and the local Land Tribunal of Seoul Special Metropolitan City recognized the transfer expenses only for the reasons that the business of the above plaintiff was commenced after the public announcement of the project approval] - Compensation for losses on March 10, 2017 - Compensation for losses: ① The plaintiff A67,630,000, ② the plaintiff B2,500,000 - An appraisal business operator: K in the absence of dispute, K in the case of K in the case of K, K in the case of K in the case of no dispute, Gap's entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3,

2. The assertion and judgment are made.