1. With respect to a guarantee insurance contract entered in the separate sheet between the Plaintiff (the Defendant in the principal suit) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff concluded a unit price contract with the Government of the Republic of Korea with a third party for a contract term of KRW 1,291,500 for a third party from January 4, 2015 to October 24, 2016, wherein the Plaintiff produced and supplied C to a procuring entity (the institution that requested the Government of the Republic of Korea to procure contract goods or the counter-party to the contract that received goods).

(hereinafter “instant unit price contract”). B.

In order to pay the contract deposit of the instant unit price contract, the Plaintiff entered into a performance guarantee insurance contract (contract) with the Defendant, which is the guarantee agency (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) as follows, and submitted the guaranty insurance policy issued by the Defendant to the Public Procurement Service.

C. During the unit price contract period of this case, the Plaintiff supplied C equivalent to KRW 687,537,360 to the end-user institution.

Meanwhile, the Ulsan Metropolitan City General Construction Headquarters, a procuring entity, notified the Plaintiff of the supply of C equivalent to the contract price of KRW 61,428,900 on November 16, 2015 to November 2, 2016, and requested that the supply deadline be extended on or around November 4, 2016 to June 30, 2017.

On November 9, 2016, the Plaintiff submitted to the Busan Local Government Procurement Office and the Ulsan Metropolitan Government General Construction Headquarters, the end-user institution, a waiver of the purchase of KRW 61,428,90 on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s purchase of KRW 61,428,90 was impossible due to the Plaintiff’s progress of the auction at the factory.

E. On May 25, 2017, the Administrator of the Public Procurement Service terminated a contract pursuant to Article 26(1)1 of the General Conditions for the Purchase of Goods (Manufacture) upon the Plaintiff’s waiver of the supply. On May 25, 2017, the contract was notified that the contract deposit is scheduled to be reverted to the National Treasury pursuant to Article 8(1) of the General Conditions for the Purchase of Goods (Manufacture), and on May 26, 2017, Article 51 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party to which the purchase contract deposit was not performed to the Defendant.