1. The Defendant’s KRW 239,234,50 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 21, 2014 to January 28, 2016.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) business recognition and public notice - Business name: B development project - Public notice: Cheongju-Public notice C on August 3, 2012, D public notice of Cheongju-si on April 5, 2013, E public notice of Cheongju-si on July 5, 2013, F public notice of Cheongju-si on December 20, 2013, Cheongju-Project: Cheongju-Project:

(b) Cheongbuk-do Regional Land Expropriation Committee on April 22, 2014 - The date of commencement of expropriation: June 20, 2014 - The details of the attached compensation shall be as specified in the attached Table.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands” - Compensation - Compensation : Total 1,739,90,500 won (land portion) obtained by taking an arithmetic mean of each of the appraisal results by the Sam Chang Chang Corporation appraisal corporations and the dialogue appraisal corporations (hereinafter “adjudication appraisal”)

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on July 16, 2015 - The details of the ruling: Dismissal (land portion): - An appraiser: a stock company: a flood appraisal corporation and the Korea Appraisal Board;

(d) this Court’s entrustment of appraisal - An appraiser: one appraisal corporation, one stock company, without a dispute (based on recognition), Gap’s 1, 2, Eul’s 4 through 5 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The land category of the instant case is “forest” but its actual status is “a field”. As such, each of the instant land should be evaluated as “the entire site” according to the actual situation of use. As the appraisal of expropriation was conducted only by the land category and the amount of compensation is set excessively low and unfair, the difference with the fair compensation should be increased accordingly. 2) Even if the Defendant’s each of the instant land is currently reclaimed and used as “the entire land”, it constitutes an illegal form and quality alteration without obtaining lawful permission for land reclamation in accordance with the Mountainous Districts Management Act, etc., and thus, it should be evaluated as the forest at the time of changing the form and quality in calculating the compensation amount.

(b) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes.

(c) judgment;