1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Attached Form 1 appraisal on the ground of B 120,710 square meters of land for a factory in Tong-gu, Dong-si, shall be attached from 120,710 square meters to 20

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From November 2009 to November 201, 2012, the Plaintiff subcontracted the block assembly work of the vessel built by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.

B. From May 201 to October 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a monthly settlement agreement with the Defendant when paying the subcontract construction cost.

The above settlement agreement included the following agreements to the effect that “any objection against the settlement amount shall not be raised or any legal issues, such as filing civil or criminal complaints,” (hereinafter referred to as “instant non-committee agreement”).

4. There is no mutual objection against all the construction contracts and work instructions entered into between A and B during the above construction period.

5. During the above construction period, it is confirmed that the quantities, unit price, and construction cost of the above construction have been calculated under mutual confirmation and agreement by both parties, and that there is no objection to the established and settled amounts.

6. By settling the monthly construction cost of Eul to Eul, Eul shall be settled at the responsibility of Eul in the event of the occurrence of all kinds of problems (including the number of its staff members) concerning Eul and his own employees (including salaries, bonuses, retirement allowances, delinquent wages, taxes and public charges, taxes and public charges, industrial accidents and all other expenses).

7. After this settlement agreement, Gap and Eul agree not to raise any legal issues, such as raising any objection to the above settlement amount or filing civil or criminal complaints, and they will not engage in any speech and behavior contrary to mutual rights and interests.

C. The Defendant reported to the Fair Trade Commission that the Plaintiff violated the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract”) due to a unit price reduction, etc., and the Fair Trade Commission decided on June 2013 that the Plaintiff violated the Subcontract Act.

The defendant around April 2013, the plaintiff's unit price reduction, the correction and additional construction cost payment, and the calculation of weight are erroneous.