A. As to Defendant A corporation and B, jointly and severally KRW 1,205,262,703 and KRW 8,800,000 among them, the case shall be 1,205,262,700.

(a)be as shown in the attachment of the claim;

B. Article 1 of the applicable law: Article 208(3)2 and Article 150(3)(2) of the Civil Procedure Act against Defendant A, D, two development companies, and F: Article 208(3)3 (a) of the Civil Procedure Act against Defendant National Highway Industry Co., Ltd.

2. Claim against Defendant B, C, and E

A. 1) The Plaintiff concluded an advance payment guarantee agreement and a limited transaction agreement with Defendant A Co., Ltd., Defendant B, C Co., Ltd., D, National Highway Industry Co., Ltd. (formerly changed: Taedok Co., Ltd.), Inc., E, two development Co., Ltd., and F as joint and several sureties. 2) The Plaintiff issued a warranty bond, contract guarantee certificate, and advance payment guarantee certificate to the guarantee creditor under the above advance payment guarantee agreement and the limited transaction agreement as listed below.

After that, there has occurred a guarantee accident due to the default of Defendant A Co., Ltd., and the Plaintiff paid a security deposit to the guarantee creditor as stated in the following table payment amount and payment date column.

B B B B ECE C CDF 3) With respect to the payment of the above deposit, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants under the Seoul Central District Court 2003Gahap47671, Seoul Central District Court 2004Gadan11047, Seoul Central District Court 2005Gada54984, Seoul Central District Court 2007Gada387509, and received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the Defendants. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute any of the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including the serial number, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the claim is as above 2.A for Defendant A Co., Ltd.

2. By paying a security deposit to the guarantee creditor as described in the table of paragraph (1), Defendant B, C, and E, a joint and several surety, acquired the right to indemnity against the said joint and several surety.

Therefore, it is true.