The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Based on its adopted evidence, the lower court: (a) drafted a written agreement by the Defendant to waive the right of retention related to the instant construction on July 23, 2008; (b) concluded on November 29, 2009, with the purport that “if construction works are suspended for 15 days or more after commencement of construction works, the Plaintiff may arbitrarily withdraw equipment, materials, materials, etc. from the site outside the site”; (c) the Defendant agreed to the effect that “if construction works are not completed by February 15, 2010, it shall immediately be terminated at the site”; and (d) the Defendant could not request the Plaintiff to complete the construction works again on June 15, 2010, which were set forth in the initial contract for construction works concluded on November 29, 2009, and the Defendant could not request the Plaintiff to complete the construction works again by 300 billion won or more after the completion of the construction works until the end of June 29, 2010, which had not been approved by the Defendant to the completion date of the construction works.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal.