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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) through the employee stock ownership association, the Plaintiff promised on December 31, 2012 that on March 27, 2012, and November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff would make up for the difference between KRW 7,00 per share of 72,723,50 per share of 30 won as of December 31, 2012, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay for the rehabilitation claim amount of KRW 72,723,50 [=19,65 shares x 7,000 won - 3,00 won].

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the two-use construction employee stock ownership association and the two-use construction did not agree to compensate the Plaintiff for the difference of shares as an independent organization.

2. On the other hand, in the relevant statutes, the employee branch system and the employee stock ownership association as the main agent of operation thereof are legislated. The employee stock ownership association, as a non-corporate group, is an organization organized by the employees meeting certain requirements in order to promote the promotion of employees’ welfare and the improvement of their economic status by acquiring and managing the stocks of the affiliated corporation, and thus, cannot be deemed as an organization identical with an employee corporation (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da10205, Jul. 24, 1998). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the two-use construction, which is not an employee stock ownership association, promises to guarantee the Plaintiff to share at KRW 7,00 per share, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, the Plaintiff’

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.