1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff, which is subject to quasi-examination, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of the construction cost as stated in this Court’s 2012Gahap491.

On March 12, 2013, the plaintiff, the defendant, and the conciliation intervenor C were mediated with the following contents at the conciliation date of the above lawsuit.

1. The conciliation intervenor shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 78,00,000,000, which shall be paid to the Plaintiff, and KRW 25,000,000 shall be paid KRW 25,000 until March 31, 2013, KRW 25,000 until April 30, 2013, and KRW 28,00,000 until May 31, 2013. If the conciliation intervenor delays the payment of the above amount at once, he/she shall lose the benefit of time, and shall pay the unpaid amount in addition to delay damages at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the day after delay until the day of complete payment.

2. By March 15, 2013, the Plaintiff withdraws the application for provisional seizure of each land owned by a person other than the Defendant among each land divided from the land divided from the land of official city D, the object of which the provisional seizure of real estate was applied for by this Court No. 2012Kahap75, which is the object of the provisional seizure application, and cancels its execution.

3. The Plaintiff shall provide the co-litigants with data on the location and quantity of soil and sand taken out at the construction site of this case.

4. The plaintiff waives his claim against the defendant.

5. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne respectively;

B. As stipulated in Article 2(2) of the Conciliation Clause, the Plaintiff issued a partial withdrawal and cancellation of the provisional seizure of real estate against the land partitioned to a third party among the objects of this Court’s application for provisional seizure of real estate (No. 2012Kahap75), but the conciliation intervenor did not pay to the Plaintiff the amount stipulated in Article 2(1) of the Conciliation Clause

C. In the case of the application for the cancellation of provisional attachment No. 2015Kahap10 against the Plaintiff, the court held that “the right to be preserved for the provisional attachment of this case is the obligation of the Plaintiff’s construction cost against the Defendant, and that the Plaintiff waives its construction cost claim against the Defendant in the lawsuit on the merits.