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

Upon entering into a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Gwangju Regional Procurement Service (hereinafter “Defendant”) issued a public notice of bid for the procurement commodities (goods) with respect to the “production and purchase of government-funded materials (D2 and marine managers) for the C development project” as of the “production and purchase of government-funded materials (D2 and marine managers)” on the B date.

After reviewing the design details, specifications, etc. of the goods disclosed in the above bidding, the Plaintiff participated in the bidding and decided as the counter-party to the contract. On August 22, 2014, the Defendant and “C Development Project (hereinafter “C Development Project”) entered into a contract with the Defendant for the manufacture of government-funded materials (DDual and Marine Managers) and the purchase of goods (hereinafter “instant contract”). An end-user institution of the instant contract is the Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Institute under the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”). The contract name of the instant contract is “the maritime floating structure,” and the contract name was “the maritime floating structure,” the contract amount was KRW 4,384,576,000, and the delivery period was August 22, 2015.

After the conclusion of the instant contract, the Plaintiff prepared and submitted a written review on the modification of the instant project to the end-user institution twice over September 2014 and November 2014, immediately after the instant contract was concluded.

On April 1, 2015, an end-user institution demanded the Plaintiff to submit to the Plaintiff a report on the change of project cost according to the plan for the expansion of the Category D Facilities of the instant business, and the Plaintiff submitted the positive report to the end-user institution on May 15, 2015 after consultation with E and the supervisory group, which is an employee of the end-user institution.

A procuring entity approved the contract to increase the contract amount to KRW 5,360,340,000 and to extend the delivery period to October 11, 2015. On July 14, 2015, a procuring entity requested the Defendant to conclude the above modified contract.

The Plaintiff’s end-user institution to suspend the performance of the instant contract has delayed the supply of materials according to the supply plan to the Plaintiff on August 7, 2015. As such, the Plaintiff’s end-user institution to suspend the performance of the instant contract established the supply plan to the Plaintiff on August 13,