【Main Office】

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From August 2, 2012 to May 27, 2014

1. The instant real estate is an aggregate building B’s exclusive ownership (504).

The Intervenor of the Independent Party (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) had the right to retention and delegated C with the possession and management of several households, including the instant real estate, inasmuch as it did not receive the construction cost of KRW 2,600,853,059 from the owner of the building for remodelling B and did not receive the construction cost.

The defendant obtained C's permission from July 30, 2010, while residing together with his family in the instant real estate from around July 30, 201, prepared a letter of performance of possession by the intervenor on January 25, 201.

The Intervenor notified the Defendant to deliver the instant real estate, as a dispute arises between C and C.

However, on May 9, 2012, the intervenor filed a lawsuit against the defendant against the defendant such as the Seoul Western District Court 2012Kadan21303 Building Names.

(hereinafter “Building Name-Do case.” The Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant real estate on August 2, 2012, when the Building Name-Do case was pending.

On August 21, 2012, the case of the name of the building was referred to the conciliation procedure (the same court 2012s.4078), and the voluntary conciliation was established between the intervenor and the defendant on August 21, 2012.

1. The defendant shall receive 12,500,000 won from the intervenor until January 31, 2013, and simultaneously deliver the instant real estate to the intervenors.

2. If the Defendant did not deliver the instant real estate by January 31, 2013, the Intervenor determines a penalty of KRW 5,000,000 to the Intervenor, and the Intervenor shall be deducted from KRW 12,50,000 as indicated in paragraph (1).

3. The defendant shall settle various public charges by the date of completion of surrender of the real estate in this case.

4. If the Intervenor, by January 31, 2013, becomes subject to the claim for the extinction of the right of retention under Article 324(3) of the Civil Act, from a stock company, at the end of January 31, 2013

A. The Intervenor’s obligation of KRW 12,500,000 against the Defendant as described in paragraph 1 shall be extinguished.

B. Penalty as stipulated in Paragraph 2 against the Defendant’s Intervenor 5.