2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. Business title - Business title: Audio C Project (hereinafter “instant Project”). - Project operator: Defendant

- Notice: Notice of Chungcheongbuk-do on July 1, 2016

D. Public notice of Chungcheongbuk-do on April 27, 2018

E.

The ruling of expropriation on July 17, 2018 by the Chungcheongbuk-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”): The commencement date of expropriation: Each land listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant land”), and individually classified into the land Nos. 1 through 3 according to the order of the above list). Separate compensation (won) is KRW 42,113,700 of the instant land No. 111,320,300, the sum of KRW 16,560,90, the sum of KRW 13,126,900 of the instant land No. 3 land No. 320, the sum of KRW 16,560,90: Compensation: The following table:

C. The Central Land Tribunal rendered an objection on January 24, 2019 (hereinafter “the instant objection”) - As a result of a new appraisal, the compensation for the instant land Nos. 1 and 2 was increased, but the compensation for the instant land No. 3 was reduced. As a result, the sum of the compensation for each of the instant lands increases to KRW 2,562,40. The amount of compensation for each of the instant lands increases to KRW 42,17,800. Section 42,922,900 of the instant land No. 113, 13,02,60 in total, 169,123,300 of the instant land No. 3 land No. 13,02,600.

D. On August 9, 2018, the Plaintiff reserved an objection and received KRW 166,560,90 as a compensation set forth in the instant adjudication on expropriation. However, the Plaintiff received KRW 2,562,400 of the increased compensation in the instant adjudication on expropriation without reservation of the objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit, the owner of the relevant legal doctrine stated that the reservation was made at the time when he/she received compensation for losses as prescribed by the adjudication of expropriation.

Even if the objection does not indicate the intention of reservation while receiving increased compensation for losses in the ruling of objection, it shall be decided.