1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff asserted that, around April 5, 2008, the defendant, the owner of the building, entered into a contract with the defendant to pay the construction cost in equal amount to KRW 50 million for each completion of the first, second, and third construction works with respect to the establishment of the Yangyang-gun C Hospital (hereinafter "the construction of this case"). The plaintiff asserted that, on the grounds of the payment of the above construction cost, the defendant filed a complaint with the police station for fraud, and the defendant filed a complaint against the defendant on the grounds of the payment of the construction cost, the plaintiff could not have the plaintiff execute the construction work. The plaintiff asserted that, on the ground that the defendant filed a complaint with the police station for fraud, the defendant would bring a single-lane of KRW 25 million and would give KRW 25 million after the withdrawal of the complaint, and did not pay the construction cost even after the withdrawal of the complaint. Thus, the plaintiff claimed against the defendant as stated in the claim against the defendant.

As to this, the defendant presented the order of the representative director of the E Company (hereinafter "E") at the time of the commencement of the new project headquarters, and argued that the construction work of this case will be dumped with approximately 15% of the other construction companies, and that the construction work of this case will also be dumped with approximately 15% of the other construction companies. However, although the plaintiff entered into a construction contract with E and the total construction cost of KRW 320 million, the plaintiff cannot make a report on the commencement of the construction work due to tax in arrears and demanded only the down payment of the construction cost, and confirmed it to E, E cannot pay the commencement of the construction due to tax in arrears, and the representative of the subcontractor cannot perform the construction work with the trust and trust of the plaintiff, and thus, the defendant cannot comply with the plaintiff's request.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff completed the primary construction by being awarded a contract with the Defendant for the instant construction work, each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 26 is insufficient to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, it is the same as G Defendant, the representative of F Co., Ltd.