1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract for the construction of the welfare center for the disabled (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the total construction cost of KRW 1,662,453,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On January 12, 2015, the Plaintiff commenced the instant construction project. On April 28, 2015, the Gangwon-do Governor issued a disposition to cancel the registration of a construction business against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff committed an act of lending a construction business registration certificate, etc. or a violation of prohibition of good offices.

C. On May 21, 2015, the Plaintiff reported the cancellation of construction business registration to the Defendant, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on May 22, 2015 that the construction will be suspended.

On June 3, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant contract was terminated pursuant to Article 14(4) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry and Article 91(1)6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which a Local Government Is a Party, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s registration of construction was cancelled.

(e) The attached Form of relevant statutes is as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 24, 26, Eul evidence No. 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Article 14(4) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry provides that the ordering person may terminate the contract where the Plaintiff’s alleged contractor’s construction business registration is cancelled, that the contract may not be completed even if the maintenance of the contract is anticipated, or that the construction work may be continued on the ground that it is extremely serious to cause danger and injury to the public by doing so. Although the Plaintiff had been subject to the disposition of cancellation of the construction business registration, the termination of the contract in this case is unlawful and invalid.

Therefore, the defendant's termination of the contract against the plaintiff on June 3, 2015.