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

(a) Project approval and public notice - Public notice of B general industrial complex development projects - Public notice of the project: Defendant on August 3, 2012

B. The Incheon Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on July 12, 2013 - subject to expropriation and compensation for losses (total amount of KRW 109,418,550), 292 square meters in the D warehouse site for Incheon Reinforcement-gun (hereinafter “instant land 1”).

(2) 33,988,800 won 2) E 1,115 square meters prior to E (hereinafter “instant land 2”): 75,429,750 won; The date of commencement of expropriation: August 12, 2013 - An appraisal corporation: a national appraisal corporation, a corporation, or a corporation;

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on April 17, 2014 - Dismissal of the results of the ruling: An appraisal corporation: a dialogue appraisal corporation, a new appraisal corporation in the future of a stock company (hereinafter referred to as “adjudication based on recognition”), and each of the appraisal results of the ruling based on acceptance rulings and its respective appraisal results [the grounds for recognition]] did not dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-18, Gap evidence 3-18, Gap evidence 4, and evidence 5-18, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion exceeds the assessed amount based on the adjudication and appraisal. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the difference between the reasonable compensation for losses and the assessed amount, as well as damages for delay.

B. In a lawsuit seeking increase in compensation for loss, the burden of proving that the amount of reasonable compensation exceeds the amount of compensation determined by the expropriation ruling or the ruling on objection is greater than the amount of compensation for loss to the Plaintiff.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Nu2255 Decided November 28, 1997, etc.). According to the result of the appraisal commission with respect to appraiser F of the instant case, the said appraiser may recognize the fact that it assessed KRW 34,923,200 on the land of this case as of the date of expropriation adjudication (as of July 12, 2013), and KRW 108,959,200 on the land of this case as of the date of expropriation adjudication (as of July 12, 2013), and KRW 2 of the instant land as of KRW 74,036,00,000 on the land of this case.

The above appraiser shall be subject to this.