1. Defendant B received KRW 2,287,827,00 from the Plaintiff and simultaneously received KRW 2,287,827,00 from the Plaintiff:

(a) Appendix 1:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction improvement cooperative established under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) to implement a housing reconstruction improvement project for the Daegu Southern-gu Seoul Metropolitan GovernmentF (hereinafter “instant project site”). On September 24, 2015, the Plaintiff was authorized to establish an association by the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City, which completed the establishment registration on October 26, 201 of the same year.

B. The Defendants are each owners of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet located within the instant project site, and constitute the owners of land, etc. under Article 2 subparagraph 9 (b) of the Urban Improvement Act.

C. On June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff Union’s promotion committee held an inaugural general meeting and passed a resolution on the implementation plan for reconstruction project. The Plaintiff Union’s promotion committee shall obtain the consent of at least 103 landowners (76.8%), among 134 owners of land or buildings within the instant project site (at least 19 landowners’ housing and 97 appurtenant and welfare facilities, and 18 landowners), and the consent of at least 15,812 square meters ( approximately 72.5%) out of the total size of land 21,808 square meters ( approximately 72.5%), and the instant project site is located within an area that is not a housing complex. As such, the consent of at least 3/4 (75%) of landowners and at least 2/3 (6.6%) of the size of the land or building pursuant to Article 16(3) of the Urban Improvement Act should be obtained.

On September 24, 2015, the head of Daegu Metropolitan City is authorized by the head of the Gu.

On October 27, 2015, pursuant to Article 39 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings and Article 48(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the “Aggregate Buildings Act”), the Plaintiff sent by mail a document stating that the Defendants, who did not agree to the establishment of the partnership, urged them to reply within two months, and if they do not reply, they would exercise the right to demand the sale (hereinafter referred to as “written demand”). Defendant B shall be sent on October 28, 2015, and Defendant E shall be sent on October 29, 2015.