1. Compulsory execution based on the Daejeon High Court Decision 2015Na1558 Decided September 1, 2016 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff is conducted.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a joint operation agreement (hereinafter “instant joint operation agreement”) regarding the instant joint operation agreement (hereinafter “instant joint operation agreement”) with respect to the instant joint operation agreement (hereinafter “instant rearrangement project”) that ordered the instant joint operation agreement at around November 2008 and June 2013, pursuant to the instant joint operation agreement.

Article 3 (Authority of Execution)

1. The plaintiff as a representative shall have the responsibility and authority to plan, manage, coordinate, etc. the overall operation of the site for the smooth performance of construction works as a whole and efficient performance of the rental work.

2. The plaintiff has all responsibilities and authority concerning the construction work, and the defendant must cooperate to the maximum extent possible with the plaintiff's smooth progress of construction work.

Article 5 (Receipt and Enforcement of Deposits/Advance Payments)

1. When claiming a progress payment or a completion payment, the tax invoice shall be issued by each company according to their respective shares and filed by the Plaintiff together, and the acceptance of the completion shall be received according to the method enforced by the ordering office.

Article 6 (Accounting)

1. The settlement of accounts following the occurrence of the cost of construction works shall be settled when the Plaintiff receives, from each trading party, all evidence related to the cost of construction works, by classifying the cost of construction works into each item of account, and the cost of construction works by the 10th of the following month, along with the cost of construction works, to the Defendant by the 10th of the following month.

2. Accounting and tax settlement shall be carried out through close consultation among the persons in charge of each company, and the tax issues shall be responsible for each company;

B. The Plaintiff asserted that part of the Defendant’s share was not paid pursuant to the instant joint operation agreement, and filed a lawsuit seeking payment of the unpaid share amount of KRW 275,320,068 against the Defendant (Seoul District Court Decision 2013Gahap380). The Defendant on June 10, 2014, who is continuing the said lawsuit, paid KRW 105,320,000 to the Plaintiff by August 15, 2014, and the said amount shall be paid to the Plaintiff.