1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 19, 201, the Defendant was awarded a contract by setting the construction period as KRW 4.75 billion from October 11, 2011 to April 30, 201 with respect to the construction of the F inananan City (first minute) from Company B and E on October 19, 201, and the construction amount as KRW 4.75 billion.

B. On October 26, 2011, the Plaintiff accepted a subcontract for reinforced concrete construction works (one unit, five unit) from the Defendant for KRW 800 million. The construction period is from October 15, 201 to January 30, 201, and the construction cost is KRW 200 million depending on the nature, and is determined to receive any balance within one month after completion.

C. On January 30, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 79,365,00 for labor cost incurred during the working period (from November 25, 201 to January 31, 2012) at the said construction site on the premises where the Plaintiff’s partner G and H, etc. are located, which are the Plaintiff’s cooperative companies, up to February 10, 2012, up to February 29, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 22,22,200,00 for each of the labor cost incurred during the said construction site; and if the Plaintiff fails to perform this, it did not raise an objection to the waiver of all rights to the construction cost and transfer the right to the balance of the construction cost to the Defendant; and written undertaking that the Defendant does not raise a civil or criminal objection to the Defendant’s on-site labor cost and the disposal of equipment costs (hereinafter the instant undertaking).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, 2-2

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff failed to perform the commitments set forth in the instant commitment, and that, if so, he/she would waive all the rights to the instant construction works and would not raise a civil or criminal objection. Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it violates the Non-Lawsuit Agreement.

B. It is understood that the instant promise does not raise a civil or criminal objection against the Defendant’s direct payment of labor costs and equipment costs, if the Plaintiff did not pay them within the fixed period of time from the time of its preparation. Furthermore, the Plaintiff is obliged to do so.