1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 10, 2006, the C&Ser Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C&Ser”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of trust with respect to the land for three parcels, other than Pyeongtaek-si C, 1366.8 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) to the C&Ser, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C&S trust”).

B. The developments leading up to the construction of the instant building, etc. 1) Dashe Construction Co., Ltd. (the trade name before the change was made is a medium and long-term construction company, which is a medium and long-term construction company.

(A) On May 31, 2007, the term “instant building” refers to the term “instant building” in the entirety of the 6th floor neighborhood living facilities and the entire business facilities of reinforced concrete structure on the instant land and the entire building on the instant land (hereinafter referred to as “the entire building”).

(1) The contract to supply the new construction cost of KRW 12.1 billion (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”).

A) On June 28, 2007, Doshe Construction concluded a contract with the Defendant for the structural construction of the 4 to 6th floor of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant structural construction”) during the instant construction.

(2) The subcontract agreement to the effect that the contract is subcontracted in the amount of KRW 2,100,000 for the construction cost (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

(2) The Defendant did not receive the construction price due under the instant subcontract while executing the instant structural construction. On June 9, 2008, the event of default on bills issued by the Defendant, which occurred and ceased the instant structural construction around June 9, 2008 without completing the structural construction of the sixth floor of the instant building.

3) Since July 2008, re-contractors, who had been awarded a subcontract for the instant structural construction from the Defendant, had the agricultural nature to demand the payment of the construction cost while staying at the construction site of the instant case. The Defendant purchased banners to the re-contractors to exercise the right of retention, and supported the Defendant on November 13, 2008.