1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. Basic facts

(a) Kind and name of the project - type and name of the project - the redevelopment and improvement project of housing redevelopment in the Purban Renewal Promotion Zone (hereinafter referred to as the “instant project”): The location of the project area: Seongbuk-gu Seoul Q Japan - the public inspection and announcement date for the designation of the urban renewal acceleration district: May 29, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the “public inspection and announcement date of this case”);

(b) Project operator: Defendant;

(c) Buildings subject to expropriation, the date of adjudication on expropriation, and the date of commencement of expropriation: To be stated in the buildings subject to expropriation;

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the defendant is obligated to pay each money as stated in the corresponding total sum of the claims in the attached Form as settlement money, dwelling relocation expenses, and director expenses to the owners of residential buildings and the plaintiffs who are residents of the building subject to the attached Form.

B. According to Article 78(1) of the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation therefor (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) that applies mutatis mutandis to the implementation of a rearrangement project pursuant to Article 40(1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), a project implementer shall either establish and implement relocation measures or pay resettlement funds, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, for a person who is deprived of his/her base of livelihood due to the provision of a residential building due to the implementation of a public project (hereinafter “person subject to relocation measures”). According to Article 44-2(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Urban Improvement Act, “the owner of a building who has not resided continuously from the date of public inspection to the date of concluding a contract for public inspection or the date of adjudication on expropriation” is excluded from the person subject to relocation measures, except for any inevitable reason such as medical care due to disease.