1. On October 31, 2018, the attached Form 26,637,100 of the deposit money deposited by the U.S. District Court No. 6007 for the year 2018, respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. G’s death and inheritance 1) G died on August 19, 2006, and the Plaintiffs (Plaintiff F is the spouse of H, who is a son of G, and H’s death on August 23, 2016, controlled and inherited H’s share of inheritance to G.

(2) According to the transcript, G, the inheritee of the plaintiffs, was born on August 15, 1930 from Ulsan-gun I on December 23, 1971 and married to J on December 23, 1971. The permanent domicile is "Ulsan-gun K in Ulsan Metropolitan City" and the domicile at the time of death is the same.

B. The Defendant’s deposit of compensation money for expropriation 1) As to the construction of roads for the building of Nowon-gun Lilwon (Seong 2-5) in Ulsan-gun, the Defendant is deemed to be the land of this case as the land of this case in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Seoul Metropolitan City Regional Land Tribunal on September 13, 2018 (hereinafter “instant land”).

(1) On October 31, 2018, the deposited person deposited KRW 26,637,700 for the instant land and obstacles with the term “N and address Yangsan-gunO,” and deposited KRW 26,637,700 for the deposited person’s land and obstacles (Ulsan District Court No. 6007, 201; hereinafter “instant deposit”).

(2) The fact that the deposit account was deposited in the deposit account is as follows: “A local Land Tribunal tried to pay the compensation adjudicated on the instant land and obstacles, but it is insolvent as the address and present location of the deposited person’s resident registration cannot be known.” The statutory provision is Article 40(2)1 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”).

3) In the written reply to the complaint of this case, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant deposited the Plaintiff’s decedent G, the land of this case, and the obstacles, and that it was absolutely impossible to identify whether the Plaintiff was the same as N, and thus, sought confirmation of the right of deposit withdrawal. C. The benefit of the lawsuit of this case is recognized. The Plaintiff’s indication and taxation on the public record 1) N purchased from P on September 9, 195 17 square meters of the U.S. O.-gun (hereinafter “land before division”) from P on July 21, 1979.