1. The Defendant’s KRW 16,020,670 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from September 12, 2015 to March 9, 2017.

1. Details of ruling;

A. Business Approval and Public Notice - Business Name: B Housing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Association (hereinafter “instant project”) and the area related to the said project: Defendant - Public Notice of project implementation authorization: Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on September 4, 2007

B. Decision on expropriation made on July 24, 2015 by the Seoul Metropolitan Government Local Expropriation Committee - Date of expropriation: September 11, 2015: - Shares of 49.91/175 square meters in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D major 175 square meters owned by the Plaintiff, and multi-household 301 reinforced concrete building 75.36 square meters in the above ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”): Compensation: Real estate 209,979,30 won in the instant case, additional dues of 78,123,810 won (from May 4, 2013 to March 679, 2015) - An appraisal corporation: Uniform Certified Public Appraisal Corporation, M&D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “appraisal”) and F&D Co.,, Ltd. (hereinafter “the result of appraisal”)

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on March 24, 2016 - Compensation: KRW 209,979,330 of the instant real estate (the appraiser on an objection made by the Plaintiff to dismiss the Plaintiff’s objection stated in the appraisal report that the price of the expropriation ruling was as it is, because the goods cannot be verified as the execution of the instant project cannot be verified as to the instant real estate due to the removal or destruction of the implementation of the instant project with respect to the instant real estate.) - An appraisal corporation: A certified public appraisal corporation which was a stock company, a corporation Jung-il appraisal corporation (based on recognition): the fact that there is no dispute; each entry in subparagraphs 1 through 3

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As for the Plaintiff’s assertion, compensation should be calculated according to the result of the court’s appraisal, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the difference between the appraisal result of expropriation and the appraisal result, and the additional provision of Article 30 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) as well as the compensation for expropriation ruling.