(a) Business name and public notice - Business name: Business name: D Housing redevelopment and rearrangement project (hereinafter referred to as “instant project,” and the area related to the said project is referred to as “instant project zone”) - Project implementer: Defendant - Public notice of project implementation authorization: Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government public notice E on March 18, 2008, and Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government public notice on June 5, 2014;

(b) Seoul Regional Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation on March 27, 2015 - The date of commencement of expropriation: May 15, 2015 - The object of expropriation: Attached Form

1. Each land and obstacles entered in the list (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) - Compensation: Attached Form 1

1. As stated in the list, “the result of appraisal of the expropriation ruling” shall be as follows:

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on October 22, 2015 - Compensation: Attached Form;

1. “Appraisal results” in the list - As indicated respectively - An appraisal corporation: An appraisal corporation, the Korea Appraisal Board, the Korea Certified Public Appraisal Corporation, and the Korea Certified Public Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Objectiond Experts”), and the said appraisal shall be deemed as an appraisal of the said appraisal; and the said appraisal shall be deemed as an appraisal of the said appraisal; and the result of said appraisal shall be deemed as an appraisal

C. On May 14, 2015, the Defendant deposited the instant land and obstacles for the Plaintiffs, and deposited compensation for losses due to the adjudication of expropriation. On December 1, 2015, the Defendant deposited compensation corresponding to the difference between the adjudication of objection and the adjudication of expropriation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 6 through 8 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The result of the plaintiffs' appraisal of the objection is too low to evaluate the land and obstacles of this case and thus, the defendant should pay the difference with the reasonable compensation to the plaintiffs.

B. Attached Form of relevant statutes

2. The description;

C. 1) The present situation of the instant land is as follows.