1. All of the lawsuits against the Defendants of the Plaintiff Jinduk Construction Co., Ltd. are dismissed.

2. on May 8, 2013:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Gi-si entered into a contract for construction works with Defendant A General Construction Co., Ltd. (formerly: Afforestation Construction Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “Defendant A General Construction”) on the construction works of the Dongba-dong Residents' Self-Governing Center (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

B. On July 31, 2012, Plaintiff Jind Construction entered into a subcontract for creative works among the instant construction works with Defendant AD General Construction. The construction period was from July 31, 2012 to September 13, 2012; and the construction cost was KRW 303,160,000, respectively.

After that, on September 19, 2012, Plaintiff Jind Construction entered into a subcontract for glass metal, roof, and Home Works among the instant construction works with Defendant Lind Construction. The construction period was from September 19, 2012 to December 21, 2012, and the construction cost was KRW 148,940,000, respectively.

C. On August 13, 2012 and September 26, 2012, the respective subcontracting prices agreed to be paid directly to the Plaintiff Jiduk Construction. D.

Plaintiff

On November 9, 2012, 2012, the Jiduk Construction transferred KRW 30,000,000 among the bonds held by the Plaintiff Jiduk Construction in accordance with the direct payment contract of the subcontract price to the Plaintiff Jiduk Construction, and notified it at the time of permitting the assignment of the credit. The above notification of the assignment of credit reached the time of November 22, 2012.

E. The liability for payment of KRW 386,618,790 as the instant construction price arises to Defendant AD General Construction. However, on May 8, 2013, the Suwon District Court rendered a mixed deposit as to KRW 386,618,790 (hereinafter “instant deposit”) under the latter part of Article 487 of the Civil Act and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act on the ground that the genuine obligee cannot be identified pursuant to the claim attachment, provisional attachment, and direct payment contract for the instant construction price.

At that time, the plaintiff .