2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. A. At around October 2011, Hoho Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Shoho Lake Construction”) was awarded a contract for the construction of a new building “D” (hereinafter “instant building”) on the second floor above and fifth floor above the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul and the fifth floor above the ground (hereinafter “new building, etc.”).

B. On December 8, 2012, the Plaintiff received a subcontract for the construction work of reinforced concrete building from the first to fifth floor above the ground among the instant construction works by setting the construction cost of KRW 409,00,000 (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontracted project,” and the said subcontracted contract is referred to as the “instant subcontracted project”). C.

The subcontracted project in this case was interrupted by the end of March, 2013.

After that, on September 16, 2013, Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) and Defendant A Co., Ltd. entered into a new contract on September 30, 2013 on the remainder of the instant construction.

In March of 2013, the Plaintiff discontinued construction work as it did not receive the construction cost from the Sungho Comprehensive Construction.

After the discontinuance of construction, the Plaintiff continuously claimed construction payment from Jun. 10, 2013 to Sungho Construction, and Defendant B filed an application for auction on part of the site of the instant building on August 14, 2012, and the procedure was conducted on June 13, 2013, the Plaintiff reported a lien to an auction court, and manufactured a banner during the exercise of a lien and installed the instant unregistered building.

E. On September 30, 2013, Defendant B led to the conclusion of the remaining contract for construction work between Defendant A and the owner of the building, and continued the instant construction work on October 2013 by taking office as Defendant A’s senior policeman on his duty.

On October 4, 2013, Defendant A prevented the Plaintiff from entering the construction site of the building that was not completed in this case.