1. The Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant Daekdong Construction Co., Ltd. in KRW 77,487,123 and its related thereto.

1. The following facts are found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 10:

A. On March 5, 2012, the Defendants entered into a joint supply and demand agreement with them, and supplied sewage from Nonparty 2, a contractor, to the construction works of Section 5-3 Section A and structures (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

On June 25, 2011, the Defendant Scar Dok Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Scarwa Construction”) re-subcontracted the instant construction project at the contract price of KRW 4.41 billion to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant sub-subcontract”). (b)

The construction work in the sub-subcontract of this case includes the work of transporting the private land generated at the site to the private soil. The location of the sand site is determined as the "Seong Mtrate Development Project Site" located in the members of Ansan-si, and the location of the Guamambi-gu C" company located in Young-si, Ansan-si. The price for transportation of the private land is KRW 371,105,000 (i.e., quantity of KRW 80,675,000 x 4,600 per square meter x 4,600 won), and the price for transportation of the tobacco is KRW 700,642,100 (number of KRW 184,379,500 x 3,800 per square meter).

C. However, each of the above private land was changed to the "Uwon Industrial Complex", "Uwon-si, Suwon-si, Howon-si, Howon-si, and Geumdong-dong.

On the other hand, around August 31, 2012, the re-subcontract of this case constitutes a so-called "Blanket Subcontract" prohibited by Article 29 of the former Framework Act on the Construction Industry (Act No. 9875) and thus, a penalty surcharge was imposed on the Defendants.

Around October 5, 2012, Defendant Scar Dok Construction declared that the Plaintiff would cancel the re-subcontract of this case on the grounds of this, which led to the Plaintiff at that time.

E. The plaintiff succeeding intervenor of this case.