Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a company that registered a construction business pursuant to Article 9 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry and runs a construction business.

B. On September 30, 2016, the Defendant requested the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport to conduct a fact-finding survey on capital, etc. among the standards for registration of construction business, and requested the Plaintiff to submit data related to the fact-finding survey, including financial statements in 2015, on October 15, 2016.

C. On December 1, 2016, the Defendant, as an administrative agency delegated by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport with the authority to cancel the registration of a construction business, notified the Plaintiff of the disposition to cancel the registration of a construction business on the following grounds, and notified the Plaintiff of the execution of the hearing (hereinafter “instant prior notice”).

Prior notice of disposition (not later than the notice of holding a hearing)

3. Disposition to suspend business (on November 8, 2013) due to a failure to meet the standards for registration which is the cause of the disposition to suspend business (on the grounds of the disposition, November 8, 2013), the amount of which falls short of the same standards for registration (on the capital in 2015)* KRW 527,02,02,854 in total capital for the year 2015 - 1,527,02,98,555 won in total assets for insolvent and concurrent business: 569,170,170,327,035 won in total, proceeds from attempted business: 76,327,035 won in total, proceeds from assessed: -6,232,200 won in total, 600,000 won in total, 73,400 won in advance: 11,95,701 won in omitted).

D. On December 16, 2016, the Defendant held a hearing with respect to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff asserted that the sales claim of KRW 600 million out of the non-performing non-performing assets excluded as above in the hearing procedure (hereinafter “instant hearing procedure”) was in existence, and recognized the remainder of the loans, etc. as non-performing assets.

E. On February 6, 2017, the Defendant issued a business suspension disposition to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff fell short of the capital standard (500 million won) among the registration standards for construction business under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry around November 8, 2013, and it did not meet the same capital standard in 2015, which was within three years thereafter,” and thus, was amended by Act No. 14015, Feb. 3, 2016.