1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 26,837,600 to Plaintiff A; and (b) KRW 23,623,00 to Plaintiff B; and (c) to each of them, from October 16, 2013 to January 2016.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Business authorization and public notice - Bogeumjari Housing Project (C Bogeumjari Housing Project; hereinafter referred to as the “instant Project”): A public notice of business approval: E, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs published on July 14, 2010 - Project operator F of the same public notice on September 17, 2010 - Defendant:

B. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on expropriation on August 22, 2013 - Land subject to expropriation - The land subject to expropriation is as indicated in the column for “land subject to expropriation” in the attached Table.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands,” and the individual lands are specified only as the parcel number, and the compensation for losses is made. - The amount of the adjudication on expropriation shall be as indicated in the attached Table.

- Commencement date of expropriation: - An appraisal corporation on October 15, 2013 - An appraisal corporation: a dialogue appraisal corporation, a stock company and a stock company;

C. The Central Land Tribunal made an objection on July 17, 2014 (hereinafter “Objection”) - The content of the adjudication: The appraisal value of each of the instant land is nonexistent, which is calculated by deducting the rent for divided superficies established on each of the instant land from the appraisal value of each of the instant land, on the basis that there is no divided superficies. The compensation was made as indicated in the “the amount of objection” column.

- Certified public appraisal corporations: Alban appraisal corporations, and future appraisal corporations;

D. The result of the court’s entrustment to the appraiser G (hereinafter “court appraiser G”) of the appraisal commission (hereinafter “court appraiser”) - The appraisal commission results: The court appraiser assessed the amount of compensation for each land of this case without considering the value of divided superficies in assessing the amount of compensation for each land of this case. The court appraisal assessed the value of each land of this case as indicated in the “court appraisal amount” column in attached Table.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 18 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that there is no divided superficies in all, and the appraised value of each land of this case calculated by the adjudication appraiser.

A person shall be appointed.