1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship 1) The Plaintiff is a stock company A (hereinafter “A”) on December 27, 2011.

2) The construction work in B (hereinafter “instant construction work”) and construction work in the amount of KRW 5,34,624,410

(2) On November 15, 2012, A concluded a contract, and finally changed the construction cost to KRW 9,286,266,000. (2) On June 30, 2014, the main co-ownership corporation Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the main co-ownership”) received a subcontract for reinforced concrete construction (hereinafter “the instant subcontracted construction”) from A for KRW 649,549,00 for the construction cost, and changed the construction cost to KRW 1,281,170,000 for the construction cost on February 21, 2013.

3) The Defendant, as a supervising company of the instant construction project, was in charge of supervision from the commencement to the completion of the instant construction project. B. Payment of construction cost and direct payment agreement1), the Plaintiff, A, and the Jeju Won Won Won Won-won agreed to pay directly the construction cost of the instant subcontracted project on or before February 2013.

2) By July 2014, the Plaintiff paid all the remainder of the subcontract price of this case, excluding KRW 93,566,00,000, out of the subcontract price of this case. (c) On May 2013, the prime public official waived the subcontracted work of this case; and (d) around the remainder of KRW 93,566,00,00 which the prime public official should perform (hereinafter “the completion work of this case”).

2) A, accompanied by a detailed statement of the nature of the subcontracted project in the instant case, to the Plaintiff, undergo a completion inspection (hereinafter “the instant completion inspection institute”).

A) Around July 1, 2014, the Defendant submitted the submission. A seal was affixed to the instant construction inspector as the responsible supervisor at the instant construction completion inspection institute. D. The seizure of the subcontract price and the Plaintiff’s deposit1) The primary creditors filed an application for provisional attachment or seizure and collection order with respect to the said claim on the premise that the primary co-creditors have the claim for construction cost to be paid from the Plaintiff, and that the decision or order was served on the Plaintiff.

2. Russa.