C As of April 20, 2005, upon the death of April 20, 2005, the plaintiff jointly succeeded to D, the defendant, E, and the plaintiff.

At the time of the death of the deceased, the deceased owned the real estate listed in the attachment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 list, among which, the real estate listed in the attachment Nos. 1 and 3 list was completed on August 17, 2005 due to legacy from April 20, 2005.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the claim for division of inherited property, etc. with the Seoul Family Court 2006 Mahap106, 106, wherein the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2 as the inherited property (the real estate stated in the separate sheet 3 is omitted). On November 14, 2006, the Plaintiff and the co-inheritors, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant

(hereinafter “instant conciliation”) .1. Attached Forms 1 and 2 is divided into shares owned by Plaintiff 8/48, Defendant 34/48, and E 6/48 shares.

2. Taxes and public charges, such as inheritance tax, due to the inheritance of this case, shall be borne by the plaintiff, the defendant, and the E at the ratio of each share specified in Paragraph 1, and the lease proceeds concerning each real estate arising after the commencement of the inheritance of this case shall be acquired at the ratio specified in Paragraph 1.

From the time of the deceased’s survival, the Defendant’s sale of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list to March 2, 2012 (when selling the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 to a third party) after the completion of the instant conciliation, shall be the building of this case.

Part of the second floor of the building was used as a residence, and the defendant's spouse F was allowed from May 2005 to December 2005 to operate a coffee shop on the first floor of the building of this case.

The Plaintiff used part of the first floor of the instant building as the automobile parts factory from the time of the deceased’s survival to March 2, 2012.

During the same period, the Defendant, while managing the building of this case, leased the remainder except the respective possession parts of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and paid the cost of lease.

Meanwhile, during the above period.