1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 17, 2016, four companies, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) jointly contracted four block (F, G, H, IBL) apartment landscaping projects ordered by the Korea Land and Housing Corporation.

(Joint Implementation Method). (b) Joint Implementation Method

Accordingly, the above four companies (hereinafter referred to as "four companies for joint supply and demand") constituted a joint supply and demand organization and entered into a joint supply and demand agreement in connection with the above construction works, and the agreement shall include C36%, Defendant 34%, D17%, Plaintiff 13% (Article 1 of the agreement), the representative shall be determined as C (Article 4 (1) of the agreement), the steering committee which is the highest resolution body for the operation of the joint supply and demand organization shall be established (Article 9 (1) 1 of the agreement), and if it is not specified in the agreement or necessary to supplement in detail, the agreement shall be reached by the steering committee.

(Article 36 of the Agreement) The contents, etc. are included therein.

C. On May 23, 2017, four joint supply companies agreed that the management committee divided a construction section into one section (FBL), the Plaintiff for two sections (GBL), the Defendant for three sections (HBL), D for three sections (HBL), and D for four sections (IBL) for four sections (IBL), and each company has all responsibilities and rights with respect to the construction section.

However, as the strategic unit price calculation zone for receiving a successful tender at the time of the joint bid is included in the Defendant’s liability zone, the amount of the installation of sculptures in the zone was calculated as KRW 71,680,000 at the time of the tender, but the actual amount was clear in relation to it, on April 10, 2018, the steering committee agreed that C and D bear 50% each of the Defendant’s excessive facilities (the maximum of KRW 150,000,000) and the Plaintiff and D did not burden the Defendant’s excessive portion.

E. The estimate of the article in the Defendant’s responsible area may be less than the first estimate.