1. As to the arbitration case of Korea Commercial Arbitration No. 1411-0060, which is an incorporated association between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Defendant is organized to operate the 4 mobile communications business with a license for the key communications business under the Telecommunications Business Act from the Korea Communications Commission (hereinafter “instant consortium”).

(2) On September 8, 2011, the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff’s trade name was “stock company’s leading member”) entered into a business agreement for the promotion of the 4 mobile communications business (hereinafter “instant business agreement”) with the instant consortium. The instant business agreement provides that, in the event a dispute arises between the parties and fails to be settled, the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board (hereinafter “Korea Commercial Arbitration Board”) shall settle the dispute in accordance with the arbitral procedures of the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board (hereinafter “Korea Commercial Arbitration Board”).

3) On September 14, 201, the Plaintiff agreed to invest KRW 200 million in the instant consortium by acquiring shares of the 4 mobile telecommunications business entity to be established after the Plaintiff, between the instant consortium on September 14, 201 (hereinafter “instant investment commitment”).

(4) After the conclusion of the instant investment commitment, the instant agreement and the instant investment commitment were entirely terminated as the instant agreement did not obtain a common telecommunications business operator’s license. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for arbitration seeking the return of the said KRW 200 million with the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”). On June 11, 2014, the Plaintiff received the same arbitral award as indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (the evidence No. 1, the same as Eul evidence No. 5), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above findings, compulsory execution based on the instant arbitral award should be permitted unless there are special circumstances.

2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. The defendant's assertion.