1. All of the lawsuits filed by the Plaintiff (Plaintiffs) for retrial of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be paid.

1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or obvious in records in this court.

Plaintiff

C, D, and E are several buyers who purchase 150 units, 136 units, and 133 units among the 6th underground and 18th underground buildings (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) above the 3rd underground floors of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul and the 18th underground buildings sold by the Defendant.

The plaintiffs asserted that the sales contract was cancelled or cancelled against the defendant, and filed a lawsuit to return the sales price (Seoul Central District Court 2006Gahap109839).

The plaintiffs sought to pay the sale price, penalty, development cost, and its delayed payment already paid due to the cancellation of an agreement or the restoration to the original state due to the cancellation of an agreement and the default of an obligation, and the sale price already paid, development cost and its delayed payment due to the cancellation of a mistake by deception.

On September 5, 2007, the court of first instance rendered a decision to dismiss all the plaintiffs' claims.

B. The Plaintiffs appealed against this and filed an appeal. The Plaintiffs extended the claim to seek the sale price, penalty, development cost and damages for delay already paid due to the cancellation of an agreement, the cancellation of a statutory rescission due to nonperformance, or the cancellation due to deception and mistake, and added the claim to seek the compensation for delay, development cost and damages for delay from the date following the scheduled date of occupancy at the first instance.

C. On May 12, 2009, the appellate court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial to the effect that “the plaintiff’s appeal, the primary claim expanded in the trial room, and each preliminary claim added in the trial room are dismissed.”

On May 20, 2009, the Plaintiffs were served with the original copy of the instant judgment subject to a retrial.

The Plaintiffs appealed (Supreme Court Decision 2009Da47715) but were dismissed by a judgment of non-trial trial on August 20, 2009, and the said judgment was against the Plaintiffs on August 31, 2009.