1. The Defendant’s KRW 310,242,480 as well as its annual 5% from October 12, 2013 to April 28, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public announcement - Project name: B urban environment rearrangement project (hereinafter referred to as "project in this case"): Defendant - Project implementer: The defendant - Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government - Public announcement of project implementation authorization and public announcement of alteration thereof: The Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government public announcement D and the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announcement E-Public announcement of compensation plan on July 24, 2009 and September 24, 2010: B public announcement of urban environment rearrangement project association B (public inspection period: from December 17, 2012 to January 5, 2013) on December 13, 2012;

(b) Decision on expropriation made on August 23, 2013 by a local Land Tribunal of Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “decision on expropriation”): The date of commencement of expropriation: October 11, 2013 - The subject of expropriation: Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 379.2 square meters (a general commercial area: 193 square meters; a Class-III general residential area: 186.2 square meters; hereinafter referred to as “instant land”). - Compensation: 5,290,446,720 won (unit price: 13,951,600 square meters) owned by the Plaintiff

(c) The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection made on May 22, 2014 - Compensation: 5,344,767,120 won (unit price: 14,094,850 square meters) - An appraisal corporation: A certified public appraisal corporation; a certified public appraisal corporation; a certified public appraisal corporation; a certified public appraisal corporation; a certified public appraisal corporation; a certified public appraisal appraisal corporation; (hereinafter referred to as “certified appraisal”) [based on recognition]; (i) there is no dispute; (ii) Gap’s evidence 1 through 7; and (iii) evidence 1 and 2; (iv) fact-finding with the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office; and

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s appraisal of the objection is unfair by evaluating the instant land excessively low. As such, the Defendant should pay the difference between the Plaintiff and the reasonable amount of compensation.

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

C. 1) The instant land is located near the northwest of the JI Station in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu. The instant land is located within the business area of the instant project, and the neighboring area including the instant land is a route shopping zone where neighborhood living facilities are located on the street.

B. The instant land is an irregular type.