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

A. On December 19, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) bided to 20,000 Bridges (total body and first; hereinafter referred to as “du thousand bridges construction”) located in the middle cover of the approximately approximately 30,000 square meters of the Gyeong River Corporation implemented by the Korea Railroad Corporation; (b) was selected as the final successful bidder of the said construction; and (c) entered into a contract with the Korea Railroad Corporation for the said construction works on December 22, 2015.

B. Meanwhile, while the Korea Railroad Corporation publicly announced bidding on two thousand bridge works, the aforementioned construction works shall be subject to patent No. 10-066678 (b) of the Defendant’s patent owned by the Defendant, and thus, the person selected as the final successful bidder was obliged to enter into an agreement on the use of technology with the Defendant, the patentee.

C. On November 27, 2015, after the Plaintiff was selected as the final successful bidder, the Plaintiff entered into a technology use agreement with the Defendant, and on January 22, 2016, entered into the instant subcontract with the Defendant with respect to the micro-computer file work among the two thousand bridge works (hereinafter “instant construction work”). From January 22, 2016 to June 15, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into the instant subcontract with the Defendant with the construction period of KRW 561 million (including value-added tax).

The Defendant completed the instant construction project from March 2016 to April 2016 at approximately one month.

(The contract period stipulated in the contract is 20,000 Bridges with the overall construction period, and the actual process has been completed for about 30 days). (e)

On October 4, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted a positive report to the Korea Railroad Corporation to the effect that there was an error in applying the cost of materials for the instant case during the instant construction, and that the contract price was increased on the grounds that labor cost was omitted in the part of the unit price calculation cost.

F. Accordingly, the Korea Railroad Corporation and the Plaintiff on October 31, 2016, on the ground of design change, etc. due to the omission of design.