1. The Defendant’s KRW 217,207,880 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 10, 2016 to April 12, 2018, and the following.

1. Details of ruling;

(a) Project approval and public notice - Project name: Guang City Urban Development Project (B) - Public notice of project approval: The defendant: C public notice of Gyeonggi-do on April 2, 2010; D public notice of king City on April 9, 2013; and E public notice of Gyeonggi-do on March 28, 2012;

B. The Gyeonggi-do Local Land Land Tribunal’s adjudication on expropriation (hereinafter “instant adjudication on expropriation”) dated April 25, 2016 - The land subject to expropriation as indicated in the “land subject to expropriation” column under the attached Table attached to the Plaintiff’s ownership (hereinafter “land subject to expropriation” shall be referred to as “instant land,” and the land number shall be specified only when referring to individual land,”) - The starting date of expropriation: An appraisal corporation and Sam Chang Chang Corporation (hereinafter “appraisal on expropriation”) on June 9, 2016.

C. The Central Land Tribunal’s ruling on an objection (hereinafter “the instant ruling”) dated January 19, 2017 - Contents of the ruling: The “amount of the adjudication” in the attached Table attached to the Plaintiff’s compensation for losses for expropriation shall be the same as the amount indicated respectively - The Central Land Appraisal Corporation and the Japanese Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Appraisal”) shall make a decision on an increase in amount: The Central Land Appraisal Corporation and the Japanese Land Appraisal Corporation (hereinafter “Appraisal”)

D. Results of each appraisal conducted on September 5, 2017 by appraiser F and January 8, 2018 (hereinafter “court appraiser”; the result of the appraisal is referred to as “court appraisal”) - Contents of the appraisal as stated in the “court appraisal amount” as stated in the attached Table in attached Table No. 3: The same shall apply to “court appraisal amount” (However, in the case of the result of the appraisal conducted on January 8, 2018 for G land, referring only to the applicable unit price according to the current status of use) [this ground for recognition] without any dispute; the evidence set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 4; the statement set forth in subparagraphs 4 through 8 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of this case and compensation for losses for the land of this case, etc., as set forth in the Plaintiff’s ruling of acceptance and objection ruling, are unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant is entitled to compensation for losses caused by legitimate appraisal and the acceptance ruling of this case.