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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On August 20, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction of the Kimpo-dong 1007 Kimpo-dong 1007 (hereinafter “instant church”). Since then, the Plaintiff entered into an additional construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) including the finishing construction and supervision among the new construction works of the instant church, and completed the construction work on January 31, 2013.

B. The Defendant paid 590,000,000 won to the Plaintiff as the price for construction, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as Seoul Central District Court 2013Gahap3547 against the Defendant for the claim for construction cost.

C. around June 20, 2013, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s representative A, the Plaintiff’s subcontractor, verified the amount agreed on the settlement of the balance of the instant construction project as KRW 100,000,000, but paid KRW 500,000 to A, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to 30,000 until July 31, 2013, and the remainder 30,000,000 until June 30, 2015. The Plaintiff immediately withdraws the legal lawsuit and the relationship between the contract is terminated after the agreement is reached to confirm that both parties will not file a civil and criminal lawsuit (hereinafter “instant agreement”). After that, the Plaintiff thereafter agreed to b.

The action was withdrawn.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 7-10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. As to the instant lawsuit seeking payment of value-added tax of KRW 69,00,000 for the construction cost of KRW 690,000,000, the Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff is unlawful as it goes against the agreement on the lawsuit, among the instant agreements.

B. In full view of the facts of recognition as above and the statement No. 13 as to the evidence No. 13, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff, at the time of the agreement of this case, had agreed to bring an action against all legal disputes related to the construction of this case while receiving KRW 100 million.