Confirmation of Claim for Payment of Deposit

On April 25, 2001, the fact that the Republic of Korea (competent Ministry of Construction and Transportation) deposited by the Gwangju District Court No. 446 on April 25, 2001 that the right to claim for payment of deposit money is confirmed to the Plaintiff.

Article 7 of the former State Property Act (amended by Act No. 2950, Dec. 31, 1976)

1. On April 25, 2001, the fact that the Republic of Korea (competent Ministry of Construction and Transportation) deposited the deposit amount of KRW 00,000,000 with the deposit number of the Gwangju District Court was deposited with gold No. 446 in 2001 shall be confirmed to be the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

As set forth in the text.

1. Indication of claim;

As the Republic of Korea (competent Ministry of Construction and Transportation) incorporates 00 square meters of 000-000 square meters into the project site for the construction of ○○ Airport in Nam-gun, Seoul on April 26, 2001, the right to claim the confirmation of the right to claim the return of deposit money on the ground that the right to claim the return of deposit money for KRW 00,000,000 deposited by the deposited person with the Plaintiff or the Defendant on April 26, 2001 as the deposit number 446 of 2001 as the deposit number for the expropriation compensation was deposited in the project site for ○○ Airport

2. Applicable provisions;

Articles 257 and 208(3)1 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment without holding any pleadings)

Head of Action

Korea

The Vice Minister of Justice Justice Kim 00

Litigation performers 00

The Legal Affairs Division of the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City 627-7 Gwangju Regional Tax Office

**********************)*

Mapopo-si 000-00

Action to confirm the claim for payment of deposit money

Cheong-gu Office

1. On April 25, 2001, the Republic of Korea (competent Ministry of Construction and Transportation) confirmed that on April 25, 2001, the right to claim a payment of KRW 000,000,000 deposited with the deposit number No. 446 of the Gwangju District Court was against the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

I request a judgment of "."

Cheongwon of the Gu

1. Facts of the cause of deposit;

A. On April 26, 2001, the Plaintiff accepted 00 m2,000 m2,000 m2, and 00 m2,00 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000,00

B. Accordingly, the Minister of Construction and Transportation and the Seoul Regional Aviation Administration, under the Plaintiff’s control, intended to pay KRW 000,000,000 for the expropriation compensation of each of the instant lands. However, around April 25, 2001, the Gwangju District Court rendered a deposit of the said compensation to the Defendant or the Plaintiff (U.S. regional tax office), who is the nominal owner on the register, in accordance with the Giju District Court Decision 446, No. 2001, Apr. 25, 2001.

2. The fact that the right to claim the withdrawal of the deposit is against the plaintiff.

A. On July 8, 1974, while Nonparty 00 was engaged in the duties concerning state property in the Mapo Tax Office, Nonparty 1 purchased each of the land of this case which was originally owned by state property in the name of maximum 00, which is its former domicile, and completed each registration of ownership transfer in the above largest 00 name as of September 27, 1991 by the 12960 registry office of the Gwangju District Court of the Republic of Gwangju District, and thereafter, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant was completed as of February 20, 201 by the receipt of the same registry office as of February 20, 2001.

B. On August 12, 1996 with respect to the land of this case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit for cancellation of the registration of land ownership transfer registration against the above maximum 00 district court 96Kahap1943 (Attached No. 73 through 76, and No. 78 of the judgment) around August 12, 1996, and the above lawsuit is concluded on November 8, 1996, and the plaintiff's winning decision is finalized on December 6, 199, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on January 24, 197.

C. After that, the defendant, between the plaintiff and the plaintiff's failure to execute the above judgment, completed the registration of ownership transfer in his name under the 3259 of receipt of February 20, 2001 with respect to each of the above land.

D. Therefore, each transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant with respect to the land in this case is a registration of invalidation based on each invalidation registration as above, and the defendant constitutes a successor after the closing of argument as the debtor in the above final judgment, and thus the plaintiff can obtain an execution clause succession to the above final judgment from the defendant, or file a lawsuit for cancellation of the transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant, which is null and void, against the defendant, and seek the cancellation of the above registration.

E. Thus, the true owner of each of the above lands must automatically cancel the registration of transfer of ownership in the above largest 00 name as the plaintiff, and as long as each registration of transfer of ownership in the defendant's name should be cancelled as the cause is null and void, the defendant has no right to the above deposit, which is compensation for the expropriation of each of the above lands. Accordingly, for the withdrawal of the deposit of this case, the plaintiff has the right to seek confirmation against the defendant, who is an interested party, that the right to claim payment of the above deposit belongs to the plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff has reached the claim of this case to seek a judgment, such as the purport of the claim.

Admission and Proof of Law

1. A certificate of deposit under subparagraph 1;

1. Court rulings No. 200

1. A certified copy of the evidence under subparagraph 3; and

1. Evidence cadastre A 4;

A. Annexs

1. A letter of designation of the litigation performer;

2. One copy of a service charge.

3. One copy of the above proof method.

4. One copy of the complaint.

August 2006

Korea

Gwangju District Court Dogpool Dogpool