1. The Defendant: (a) to Plaintiff A, KRW 7,69,080, KRW 50,736,90 to Plaintiff B, KRW 24,705,240 to Plaintiff C, and KRW 21,468 to Plaintiff D.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business approval and public notice - Railroad construction project (K; hereinafter referred to as "project in this case"): The defendant: HO-project operator announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on October 13, 201, which is public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on August 28, 2008, of L L/W on August 29, 2008.

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on November 16, 2012 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”) - Land to be expropriated: The phrase “subject to expropriation and remaining land” in attached Table 2 is as indicated.

- Compensation for losses: The phrase "compensation amount" in the attached Table 2 stating the amount of compensation.

- With respect to a claim for appraisal of the remaining land: The date of expropriation shall not be compensated because there is no decrease in the price of the land owned by the plaintiffs: the date of expropriation: the new appraisal corporation in the future of the Dispute Settlement Bank, the appraisal corporation in the Dispute Settlement Bank and the appraisal corporation in the Dispute Settlement Bank (hereinafter the above appraisal corporation shall be referred to as "each appraisal company," and the results of the appraisal shall be referred to as "each appraisal") / [the grounds for recognition] without dispute; the entries in Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, 2, Eul 1, and 2 (including the number of each appraisal company), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The amount of compensation for loss in the plaintiffs' assertion and ruling of acceptance should be increased and compensation for loss should be paid due to the difference in the value of the remaining land because the difference in the standard of comparison or the difference in the value of the goods was found to be excessively underestimated.

B. In a lawsuit involving an increase or decrease in the amount of compensation for land to be expropriated, each appraisal agency’s appraisal and the court’s appraisal and assessment are based on the appraisal methods, and there is no illegality in the appraisal methods, and the remaining factors for price assessment except for individual factors. However, in a lawsuit involving an increase or decrease in the amount of compensation for land to be expropriated, there is a difference in the appraisal results due to a somewhat different difference in the appraisal methods.