The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

A. The plaintiffs New Village Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Co., Ltd.") is a company established on September 1, 1997 with the construction business, etc. as a target business and contracted B-built construction from the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "the above construction work" and "the above construction work"). The plaintiff Co., Ltd is an employee of the plaintiff Co., Ltd. as a field agent of the construction work of this case.

B. On April 30, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition to give two points to each of the Plaintiffs on the following grounds.

(1) Under the following, the location of a basic file (10 points) different from design documents: Y1, X2 (60cm), X3 (120cm), X4 (120cm), X5 (120cm), X6 (60cm), former Construction Technology Management Act (amended by Act No. 11794, May 22, 2013), Articles 21-4 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Construction Technology Management Act (amended by Act No. 11794, May 22, 2014; hereinafter the same shall apply), Articles 27, 28, and 25 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Construction Technology Management Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport No. 94, May 22, 2014), and Article 3 (1) through (3) of the former Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport No. 1175, May 22, 2014);

2. The plaintiffs' assertion or related laws

A. Although the non-existence of the grounds for disposition No. 1 of the plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiff company constructed a basic file in a location different from the original design documents, the structural safety of the building of this case was examined, and then the supplementary construction was conducted based on this, so there is no problem in the structural safety of the building of this case. Thus, the plaintiffs faithfully constructed the

The defendant.