1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On November 22, 2016, the Defendant entered into a subcontract (hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontract”) with respect to reinforced concrete construction among construction works related to Nurienna Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Nurienna”), and Yeonsu-gu Incheon apartment complex A (hereinafter referred to as “A apartment”) by setting the construction period of reinforced concrete construction from November 22, 2016 to July 31, 2019, the contract amount as KRW 22,065,838,420 (including value-added tax, and labor cost, KRW 11,473,728,40).

However, since then, the Nurina Construction was suspended, the Defendant terminated the instant subcontract on April 25, 2017.

The Plaintiff filed an application for a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”) with respect to the following claims with respect to No. 1937 of No. 1937, a notary public of the Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office, which belongs to the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office, as the title of execution of the No. 3,458,298,979 claims against NFC, and the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision to accept the above application on May 16, 2017:

Amount claimed: Claim amount to be collected and seized at KRW 1,700,000: The above claim amount out of the progress payment for reinforced concrete construction works of A-built apartment that the obligor and Nurienc holds against the defendant against the defendant: Provided, That an amount equivalent to wages to be paid to workers of the relevant construction works (including subcontracted construction works) out of the contract amount of the construction works for which the constructor is awarded a contract under Article 88 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry shall be excluded.

The original copy of the instant seizure and collection order was served on May 19, 2017 on the Defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, and the summary of the plaintiff's assertion as to the whole purport of the argument by the parties concerned, the plaintiff obtained a seizure and collection order of this case against Sovienc as the execution claim of the claim Nos. 3,458,293,979.