1. The final claim inspection judgment of Seoul Central District Court No. 2014 dated May 11, 2015 (2014) shall be amended as follows:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s use of equipment owned by the Defendant 1) The obligor A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”).

[2] Dusan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “dusan Construction”)

(1) From D Construction Works (Section 1), soil and structure works (hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontracted works”).

(2) A was awarded a subcontract for the instant subcontracted project, from August 25, 2013 to January 24, 2014.

A is 24,66,00 won for equipment user fee to be paid to the defendant.

B. On January 13, 2014, including the commencement of rehabilitation procedures against A, A filed an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures with the Seoul Central District Court 2014 Gohap9, and the said court rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures against A on February 7, 2014.

The plaintiff, as a representative director of A, was considered as a custodian in the rehabilitation procedure for A.

C. On February 28, 2014, 201, 200,000 won was paid out of the Defendant’s obligation to use equipment on behalf of the Plaintiff, 2.2) On February 28, 2014, the Defendant drafted “Written undertaking of Claim for Equipment-Substitutioned Construction” as indicated in the attached Table on 28, 2014.

The above certificate of claim assurance states that the amount of credit is the blank space, and that "the amount of credit subrogated to the defendant is reported as a rehabilitation claim because dusan Construction is reported as a rehabilitation claim, the defendant must not report it as a rehabilitation claim separately."

1) On March 22, 2014, the Plaintiff reported KRW 24,666,00 to the above court as a rehabilitation claim. On March 22, 2014, the Plaintiff recognized KRW 22,00,000, which was issued a tax invoice among the bonds reported by the Defendant, as a rehabilitation claim, and denied the remainder of KRW 4,66,00. On September 18, 2014, the Plaintiff deleted the portion of KRW 22,00,000,000, which was already issued by the Defendant on the ground that he/she was paid a claim from the two Busan Construction.