1. Compulsory execution against the Defendant based on the payment order of the Daejeon District Court No. 2014j 264 against the Defendant.

The plaintiff A is the owner of each building listed in attached Forms 1 and 3 located on the ground of Geumsan-gun C, and the plaintiff B is the owner of each building listed in attached Form 2 located on the same ground.

(Attachment 1) The buildings consisting of four factories and one office, and the buildings of paragraphs 2 and 3 are one factory, each of which is referred to as “instant factory” and the buildings of paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 are referred to as “1, 2, and 3 buildings” by the sequences of Attached 1, 2, and 3). Plaintiff A becomes the children of Plaintiff B.

The Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant regarding the instant factory as indicated below [Attachment 1].

(1) On March 17, 2011, the Plaintiff 1’s single-story factory from April 30, 201 to April 29, 2014, on April 2500, 201 to April 15, 2000, 15,000 single-story factory from 595 square meters in a single-story factory from 390 square meters in a 595 square meters in a 200-story factory from 396 square meters in a 396-story factory to 3962 square meters in a 396-story factory from September 28, 201, the lease agreement of this case was terminated in the aggregate on September 30, 201 to 304:40 square meters in a single-story factory from 595 square meters in a 10-story factory from 390 square meters in a 396-story factory from 39604 square meters in a 2011.

The Defendant did not restore the destroyed or damaged portion of the factory of this case to its original state and returned it to the Plaintiffs.

After the termination of the instant lease agreement, D, an employee of the Defendant, sent to the Plaintiffs the mail, which arranged the part requiring the restoration of the plant of this case on July 15, 2014.

The above mail contains a statement that it would give an estimate of restitution costs by referring it to the plaintiffs.

Although there was no record on the specific estimated amount sent by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs at the time, the Defendant stated that the cost of restitution was only two to thirty million won during the preparatory date for pleading on May 11, 2015.