2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim on the principal lawsuit is dismissed.

3. An objection to the trial.

A. On September 3, 2012, the Plaintiff prepared a construction subcontract agreement with the Defendant (the trade name at the time is a stock company D; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) to subcontract the construction of the machinery and equipment works (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction works”) from among the new construction works of the long-term B apartment (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”) that was in progress in the Jeonnam-gun C (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”) with the Defendant during the construction period of 259,640,000 won (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the construction period from August 21, 2012 to April 21, 2013. On April 21, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared a construction project subcontract agreement that changes the said construction period from August 21, 2012 to June 12, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). (b)

After the completion of the instant construction in relation to the payment of the construction cost under the instant subcontract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to transfer the shares of 1/2 of the instant apartment No. 202 to the Defendant in lieu of a partial payment of the construction cost.

(hereinafter “instant accord and satisfaction agreement”). C.

Since July 2013, the New Apartment Construction Corporation completed the construction of the instant apartment, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 82,833,772 as the instant construction cost to the Defendant from March 15, 2013 to May 15, 2013. On June 7, 2013, after receiving a loan certificate from the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid KRW 23,000,000 out of the instant construction cost to the Defendant’s subcontractor. From June 19, 2013 to July 1, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 29,030,000 to the Defendant’s subcontractor.

However, the Plaintiff did not perform its obligations under the instant accord and satisfaction agreement.

Meanwhile, from May 23, 2013 to May 29, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted a total of KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant five times, and the said KRW 80,000 was immediately withdrawn on the date of deposit.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 10 (including provisional numbers, hereinafter the same), and the purport of the whole pleadings.