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

A. On March 20, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant, under which the Defendant received KRW 150 million from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant entered into a contract for construction of a farming house in New-nam-gun, New-gun, Seoul.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract,” and the house constructed under the instant contract is referred to as the “instant building”). B

Under the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 94,950,000 to the Defendant from March 20, 2014 to October 29 of the same year.

C. The Defendant constructed the instant building in accordance with the instant contract and completed the 2nd floor structural construction. However, the Plaintiff did not properly construct the instant building and filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant as a crime of fraud around February 23, 2015, while there were many defects in the part already connected to the Defendant’s construction.

On April 22, 2015, the Defendant, at the Plaintiff’s request, drafted a letter of performance and a letter of waiver of construction with the purport that “I will not participate in all reconstruction of the instant building later, will not waive construction and will not thereafter raise a civil or criminal objection.”

E. The Plaintiff received the above performance memorandum and the written withdrawal of the waiver of construction works, and withdrawn the complaint against the Defendant, and again filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant as a crime of fraud.

F. The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months and three years of suspension of execution for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant was indicted under the 2015 Highest 1019, 2016 Highest 1025 (merger) and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the following reasons: (b) “I deception the Plaintiff as if I were to perform the instant contract even if I had no intent or ability to perform it; and (c) deceiving the Plaintiff as if I were to perform the instant contract.”

G. The Defendant appealed against this, and in the case of Gwangju District Court 2017No713, the appellate court, the appellate court, “the Defendant completed the 2nd floor foundation construction and the external bed construction.” There is no evidence that the final ratio of the Defendant’s performance does not significantly fall short of the ratio of the cost of the construction paid by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant mutually.