1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business name: An urban development project (C) - A project implementer: Defendant - A public announcement of the designation, etc. of an urban development zone: D public notification of Sungnam-si on May 30, 2014, E public notification of Sungnam-si on June 15, 2015, E public notification of Sungnam-si on September 17, 2015, and G public notification of Sungnam-si on November 8, 2016;

B. The ruling of expropriation made by the local Land Tribunal of Gyeonggi-do on May 15, 2017 - Land subject to expropriation: Each land listed in the attached Table 1 attached hereto owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter “each land of this case”) - Compensation amount: The same shall apply to the statement in the attached Table 2 attached hereto.

- The date of commencement of expropriation: June 29, 2017 - Appraisal and Assessment Agency: H athletic branch, Inc. I

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on February 22, 2018 – The amount of compensation for losses: The same shall apply to the statement in the column of “the amount of compensation for objection” in the attached Table 2.

- Appraisal Agency: J. K.K.

D. The result of the market price appraisal of each of the instant lands by the court appraiser L (hereinafter “court appraisal result”) - The court appraisal result is as indicated in the “court appraisal amount” column in the annexed list.

E. On June 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection to the adjudication of expropriation with the Central Land Expropriation Committee.

F. On the other hand, on November 17, 2015 with respect to each of the instant lands, a decision to commence a compulsory auction for real estate by an application of the creditor Mbank, etc. was rendered, and the creditors’ seizure was concurrent with respect to compensation for losses due to the ruling of expropriation. On June 26, 2017, the Defendant deposited the total amount of KRW 12,010,492,000 for the Plaintiff’s compensation following the ruling of expropriation.

(C) The Defendant did not enter the person to whom the deposit was made at the time of deposit, and the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land for Public Works (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) under the statutory provision. (4) The term “the deposit in this case” refers to “the deposit in this case, and the deposited money” refers to “the deposit in this case.”