1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. On December 7, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) concluded a contract with the Defendant for construction of a new building located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant construction contract”); and (b) concluded a performance guarantee insurance contract as indicated in the attached Table with the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd”) as the insured regarding the said construction project on March 12, 2013.

The defendant filed a claim against Seoul Guarantee Insurance for the payment of the insurance money based on the above performance guarantee insurance contract even though there is no defect in the new building after the completion of the above Moel Construction. Thus, the plaintiff is seeking to prevent the situation where the Seoul Guarantee Insurance paid the insurance money to the defendant of Seoul Guarantee Insurance and then claims the reimbursement against the plaintiff.

2. The issue of whether the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. bears the obligation to pay insurance money based on the above performance guarantee insurance contract against the Defendant, and whether the Plaintiff bears the obligation to pay indemnity money to the Defendant for Seoul Guarantee Insurance is determined depending on whether the Plaintiff bears the obligation to repair the defects pursuant to the instant construction contract. As such, seeking confirmation of the absence of the obligation to repair the defects pursuant to the instant construction contract against the Defendant is a direct and valid and appropriate means to resolve disputes between the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.

The Plaintiff seeking confirmation of legal relations as to the existence of the claim for insurance between the Defendant and the Seoul Guarantee Insurance is seeking to resolve the dispute bypass between the third parties, and it cannot be deemed an effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute. Therefore, the claim in this case has no benefit of confirmation.

3. Conclusion, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.