1. The Defendant’s KRW 9,531,200 as well as 5% per annum from February 7, 2013 to April 9, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business name and public notice - Business name: Business name - Public notice of the Bogeumjari Housing District Development Project (B): Defendant: C public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on December 3, 2009, D public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on April 27, 2010, E public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on April 17, 2

(b) The Central Land Expropriation Committee’s ruling on expropriation on December 14, 2012 - Subject to expropriation: F forest land 1,036 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”): - The date of commencement of expropriation: February 6, 2013 - Compensation: 189,070,000 won - The Land Appraisal Corporation and the National Land Appraisal Corporation;

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on August 22, 2013 - Compensation: 193,317,600 won increased to 193,317,600 won - An appraisal corporation: Sam Chang Chang and an appraisal corporation and the Korea Appraisal Board (hereinafter referred to as “appraisal for a ruling” in combination with the appraisal for a ruling on expropriation, and each result of appraisal

D. The result of the market price appraisal conducted by the appraiser G (hereinafter “court appraiser”) of this Court (hereinafter “court appraisal”): 202,848,800 won (based on recognition”), each entry of Gap’s 1, 2, and Eul’s 1 through 4 (including each number), the result of the market price appraisal conducted by the appraiser G of this Court, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the amount of compensation for losses arising from the appraisal of the Plaintiff’s assertion on the instant land is too underfinite, the difference between the legitimate compensation amount based on the court appraisal and the above compensation amount should be paid.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. In a lawsuit as to an increase or decrease of compensation 1, each appraisal and each court’s appraisal and assessment based on the assessment methods do not constitute an unlawful cause in their assessment methods, and there is a difference in the appraisal results due to a somewhat different relationship between the appraisal and the other price factors except for the comparison of goods. However, one of them is erroneous in the assessment contents.