(a) Business approval and public notice - Housing site development project: L operator announced by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on April 24, 2012, which is public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on June 28, 2007, as published by the Ministry of Construction and Transportation on December 31, 2008, as published by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on December 24, 2012;

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on May 23, 2013 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”) - Land to be expropriated: The details of compensation for losses are as indicated in the “detailed and land category” column in the annexed Form.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands” and, when referring to the individual lands, hereinafter referred to as “instant land -”) - Compensation for losses: Plaintiff A 931,795,200, Plaintiff B 1,87,97,800, Plaintiff C486,162,000, Plaintiff D486,162,162,000, Plaintiff E352,554,100, Plaintiff F868,405,700, Plaintiff G358,515,600, and the date of expropriation: An appraisal corporation and a central appraisal corporation of the credit rating company on July 16, 2013;

C. The Central Land Tribunal made an objection on April 17, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant objection”) by the Central Land Tribunal (hereinafter “the instant adjudication”), and the content of the adjudication, including the said adjudication of expropriation and the said adjudication of objection, are as follows: The “amount of the objection” stated in the attached Form “amount of compensation for losses”.

- An appraisal corporation: Each appraisal corporation and the appraisal corporation of the country in charge of the dispute resolution (hereinafter referred to as "each appraisal corporation at the time of the adjudication," and "each appraisal corporation" as at the time of the adjudication, shall be referred to as "each appraisal corporation", and the result of the appraisal shall be referred to as "each appraisal" / [based] without dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, and Eul Nos. 1 through 3 (including the number of each appraisal company) and the

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The amount of compensation for each of the instant judgments asserted by the Plaintiffs was excessively under-determined because it was not properly selected as a comparative standard or as it was not sufficiently assessed due to the lack of the individual factors, other factors, etc., so the compensation should be increased.

(b).