1. Of the instant lawsuits, the Central Land Expropriation Committee’s revocation of the adjudication of expropriation and the claim for expropriation of the remaining land.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: Yongcheoncheon Teaching School-Private School Construction Works - Project implementer: Gyeongbuk-Public announcement on March 19, 2015; No. 2015-94;

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling of expropriation on October 22, 2015 (hereinafter “instant adjudication of expropriation”): Land listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant incorporated land”) and obstacles listed in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant obstacles”): Compensation for losses: KRW 77,217,00 for the incorporated land, KRW 103,61,30 for the instant obstacles, and KRW 103,661,30 for the instant obstacles: An appraisal corporation on December 15, 2015 - An appraisal corporation and central appraisal corporation;

C. The court’s entrustment of appraisal to the appraisal corporation E.I.D. (hereinafter “court appraisal”) - Contents of appraisal: In this case, there was no difference in the value of the remaining land and the remaining buildings; and in the case of “new construction or construction works based on the same structure, size, use, area, etc.” the 151,100,000 won is required when the buildings and obstacles to the part expropriated in the instant public works are “new construction or construction works based on the same structure, size, use, area, etc.” The appropriate land price for the incorporated land is KRW 80,211,100.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence No. 1 (including each number in the case of additional number), the result of the appraisal commission to Eul Won appraisal corporation, the appraiser of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Attached Form 5 of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

3. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant adjudication on expropriation is unlawful, such as not including the remaining land in the subject of expropriation, as stated in the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of the adjudication on expropriation and the subject of expropriation of the remaining land. As such, the instant adjudication on expropriation should be revoked, and the remaining land should be additionally included in the subject of expropriation as follows. 2) The Plaintiff’s request for expropriation of the remaining land shall process and sell and store agricultural products around October 194