(a) Business name - Business name: Support projects, such as the 2018 PyeongChang Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”).

[1] - The Governor of Gangwon-do - The Governor of Gangwon-do - The Public Notice of Gangwon-do on May 2, 2014, and the Public Notice of Gangwon-do on October 28, 2014

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation made on April 23, 2015 - The date of expropriation: June 16, 2015 - the date of expropriation: The Gangwon-gun G trees (Plaintiff A), H and I ground trees (Plaintiff B), and compensation trees (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant trees”) on the ground trees (hereinafter referred to as “the instant trees”), both of which are indicated in the following table:

A C K K K G G I H LJ

C. On May 7, 2015, the Defendant deposited the compensation upon the adjudication of expropriation, and notified the Plaintiffs on May 7, 2015. Plaintiff A appears to have written notice to the Plaintiffs on May 22, 2016; Plaintiff B’s KRW 41,030,000 on May 15, 2015; Plaintiff B’s KRW 452,760,000 on May 22, 2015; Plaintiff corporation appears to have written notice of KRW 452,760,00 on May 22, 2015.

(A) each objection has been retained and received. [Grounds for recognition] The absence of dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 6 (if available, each entry, including each number, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As the result of the Plaintiff’s appraisal conducted by the Defendant shows that the transfer cost of the trees of this case and the price of the goods are excessively low, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiffs the difference between the reasonable compensation according to the court appraisal result and the reasonable compensation.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Fact 1) The Korea Appraisal Board and the Diplomatic Appraisal Board, an appraiser for the acceptance and ruling of the acceptance and ruling of the compensation amount, have no publicly notified price data for the trees of this case, and are the same kind of trees corresponding to the same speed (as indicated below, the appraisal corporation for the stock company which the defendant appraised for consultation with the entire plaintiffs, and the appraisal appraisal corporation for the stock company, Sight Appraisal Corporation, and Sam Chang Chang Co., Ltd. as indicated below.