Statement — “To build more usable space, extra FSI (Floor Space Index) needs to be brought/obtained.”\nAssumptions:\nI. The person addressed does not know the meaning of FSI.\nII. More space will reduce the construction cost.

Introduction / Context:
The sentence links the goal (more usable space) with the means (extra FSI). We must test whether it presupposes ignorance of the term FSI or a claim about cost reduction.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: To get more built-up area, obtain higher FSI.
• Assumption I: Listener does not know what FSI means.
• Assumption II: More space will reduce construction cost.

Concept / Approach:
Neither is necessary. The advice stands regardless of the listener’s prior knowledge (the term can be used among professionals), and cost may rise with more space; the statement is about feasibility, not cost savings.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I not required: expertise of the listener is irrelevant to the logic.2) II not required: cost behavior is not asserted; often more area increases absolute cost.

Verification / Alternative check:
Whether or not the person knows FSI, getting more FSI remains the structural route to more buildable area.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any option claiming I or II adds unnecessary or incorrect content.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming every instruction implies ignorance or a cost claim; here it merely states a planning precondition.

Final Answer:
Neither assumption I nor II is implicit.