1.(a)

The defendant Dai Puld Co., Ltd. shall list attached Table 1 to P. S. S. S. P. S. S.

1. The description of the grounds for the claim is as shown in attached Form 2;

2. Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;

3. Part that partially dismissed (the part on the claim for payment of money).

A. In the event that it is impossible to execute the delivery of movable property as stated in paragraph (1) of the plaintiffs' assertion, it is liable to pay KRW 103,800,000, which is equivalent to the market price of movable property as listed in the [Attachment 1] List 1, which is equivalent to that of movable property as listed in the [Attachment 1] List 1, which is the compensatory damages following the plaintiffs' claim. The defendant Co., Ltd. is liable to pay KRW 19,70,000,000, which is equivalent to the market price of each movable property listed in the [Attachment 2-6]

B. In case where a creditor files a lawsuit by combining the claim for compensatory damages on behalf of the claimant in addition to the claim for the original performance, the claim for compensatory damages is based on the premise that the claim for compensatory damages exists, and where this is impossible before the judgment becomes final and conclusive, or where it becomes impossible to execute the claim after the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the consolidation between the two parties is permitted as belonging to the simple combination of the claim for compensatory damages and the future performance claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 75Da450, Jul. 22, 1975). However, the claim for the transfer of movable property of the plaintiffs is a real right claim as the claim for compensatory damages on the premise that the plaintiffs are the owner.

However, the plaintiffs' assertion or non-performance is based on the premise that the plaintiffs are no longer able to claim the return of owned property as they lose their ownership. In such a case, it cannot be said that they have the right to claim the return of owned property under Article 390 of the Civil Act for the reason that the realization of the right to claim the return of owned property is objectively impossible.

3.2