1. Of the plaintiff D's lawsuit, part of the claim for compensation for losses concerning the business conducted in the building located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul F.

1. Details, etc. of ruling;

(a) A business name: A business name: A business name: A project for improving the redevelopment of houses in the E area (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”): Defendant - Business area: Defendant - Seoul Metropolitan Government Gdong (hereinafter referred to as the “Gdong”) for H H 86,921.7 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “instant business area”): A public notice of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on January 17, 2013;

(b) The Seoul Special Metropolitan City local Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on January 20, 2017 - The subject matter of expropriation or the business subject to business loss compensation: The same shall apply to the corresponding portion of the attached compensation for losses.

- Adjudication on expropriation: As shown in the corresponding part of the annexed compensation sheet.

- Date of commencement of expropriation: An appraisal corporation on March 10, 2017 - An appraisal corporation: the KJ and the K K.

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on September 21, 2017 - The adjudication on an objection made by the Central Land Tribunal: The same shall apply to the corresponding portion in the separate sheet of compensation for losses.

- An appraisal corporation: Documents attached to the application for supplementation of appraisal by July 17, 2018, which submitted to the credit rating company and the plaintiffs in the credit rating company.

2. Each entry in Gap's evidence 1-2, Eul's evidence 1-4, 5, and 8, Gap's evidence 3, 4, Gap's evidence 8, and 9-1, 2, 3, 6, and Gap's evidence 10-1, 2, and Eul's evidence 1-4, 5, and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to Plaintiff A’s claim

A. Since the N, which is the object of accommodation owned by the Plaintiff as above, is located in the market area, as the Plaintiff’s assertion by the Plaintiff is located in the market area, the transaction cases for correcting other factors in the market price appraisal should be selected regarding real estate located in the market area.

However, unlike this, the court appraiser selected the transaction cases of real estate falling under the "residential area or residential zone" and calculated the correction of other factors concerning the first land, which is improper.

The court appraiser has set up a market zone on the ground that the commercial zone of the market where the land of the first is located is deteriorated due to the implementation of the improvement project.