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

A. The plaintiff is a company aimed at the work of dismantling non-structures, and the defendant is a company that carries on the construction business.

B. On May 10, 2012, the Defendant entered into a subcontract with the Plaintiff to set down a down payment at KRW 118,800,000 for the part of the removal works among the above construction works. Accordingly, the Plaintiff completed the removal works on the said construction site.

C. On June 14, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to transfer the ownership and right to dispose of the scrap metal arising out of the said removal works to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant contract for acquisition of the scrap metal”). On June 14, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 250 million as the price for the said removal works.

The scrap metal acquired by the Plaintiff under the instant contract for the acquisition of the scrap metal is 298,450km.

(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff, at the time of concluding the contract for the acquisition of the scrap metal of this case with the defendant, agreed to pay 250 million won under the actual amount of deposit after paying 205 million won under the name of deposit at the time of the provisional calculation of 600 to 700 tons of the estimated amount of scrap metal generated by the plaintiff at the time of the conclusion of the contract for the acquisition of the scrap metal of this case with the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to pay 255 million won under the claim for compensation which is the difference in the actual amount of deposit. Thus, according to the above basic facts, the contract for the acquisition of the scrap metal of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant was concluded, and it is recognized that the plaintiff paid 250 million won to the defendant and 298,450 kilograms of the scrap metal of this case, but it is recognized that the plaintiff brought about 298,450 kilograms of the scrap metal of this case to the defendant and the testimony of the witness of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant.