1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) respective costs of KRW 88,735,845 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and KRW 24,885,774 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. According to the existence of a lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants for the possession of the building, the lease agreement between the plaintiff and the plaintiff for the possession of each building stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3 is acknowledged.

The Plaintiff’s assertion that the money paid by the Defendants ought to be deemed as a honorarium for land free use, and that it cannot be deemed as a rent for land lease. However, considering the background leading up to the Defendants’ payment of money, the background leading up to the Plaintiff’s filing of the lawsuit, etc., it is difficult to evaluate it as a simple honorarium

Defendant B may claim legal superficies under customary law, but it is not accepted as there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

2. As long as each lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the Plaintiff’s claim for principal lawsuit is acknowledged, the Plaintiff’s claim for removal of the building and the return of unjust enrichment against the Defendants on the ground of the Plaintiff’s unauthorized occupation cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants occupy without permission, and the defendants exercise their right to purchase the land lessee's right for the purpose of owning the building. Thus, the fact that each of the above-mentioned lease agreements was terminated is deemed to have no dispute between the parties.

Where a lease contract for the purpose of owning a building expires and a building exists, a lessee may exercise his/her right to purchase.

(Article 643 and Article 283 of the Civil Act). The sales contract was established between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as to each of the buildings stated in the claims for the purchase by the Defendants.

The Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 88,735,845 to Defendant B and KRW 24,885,774 to Defendant C, respectively, with the purchase price for the building in accordance with each entrustment of appraisal by this court.

Defendant B is a trees.