1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) was a corporation for the purpose of civil engineering and construction works, and was awarded a contract for the construction of a new city (stage 1) project (stage 3) project (stage 1) for the construction project (hereinafter “instant construction project”). On October 1, 2013 and December 6, 2013; and on February 10, 2014, with the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) for the instant construction project, the subcontract was concluded (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

B. Each of the instant subcontracts has the following dispute settlement provisions (hereinafter “instant dispute settlement provisions”) regarding the occurrence of disputes between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.

[The terms and conditions of each of the subcontract agreements of this case] Article 31 (Objection and Dispute Settlement) (1) and B (Defendant) shall comply with the matters not specified in this contract and individual contracts, or other documents and, if there is any dispute in the interpretation of the contract, shall be applied, and if there is no data, shall be resolved through mutual consultation.

(2) When an agreement under paragraph (1) is not reached, an application for mediation may be filed with the construction dispute mediation committee under Article 69 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, or the subcontract dispute mediation committee under Article 24 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, or an application for mediation with an arbitration agency

C. After that, from March 2014, disputes arose between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant regarding the payment of the construction cost, and the Plaintiffs, on June 25, 2014, cannot complete the construction work within the construction period due to the Defendant’s cause attributable to the Defendant.