1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was as follows: (a) the Plaintiff attended the Daejeon District Court’s Joint District Court Branch Branch 2012Gahap491 as a participant in the conciliation of construction price; and (b) on March 12, 2013 between the Plaintiff, Defendant, and C, conciliation was concluded as follows.

1. The Plaintiff shall be paid KRW 78,00,000 to the Defendant, and KRW 25,000,000 shall be paid KRW 25,00,000 until March 31, 2013, and KRW 28,00,000 until April 30, 2013, and KRW 28,00,000 shall be paid in installments until May 31, 2013. If the Plaintiff delays the payment of the said amount at one time, he/she shall lose the benefit of time, and shall pay the unpaid amount by adding the damages for delay at the rate of KRW 20,00 per annum from the following day to the day of full payment.

2. By March 15, 2013, the Defendant withdraws an application for provisional seizure against the land owned by a person other than C among each land divided from the land divided from the land of official city D, the object of provisional seizure against real estate (No. 2012Kahap75) of this Court, which is the object of provisional seizure against real estate, and cancels its execution.

3. The Defendant shall provide the Plaintiff with data on the location and quantity of soil and sand taken out at the construction site of this case.

The plaintiff's obligation stipulated in paragraph (1) of the above conciliation clause is a condition suspending the performance of the defendant's obligation stipulated in paragraph (3) of the above conciliation clause, and the defendant did not provide the plaintiff with data on the location and quantity of soil taken out to the present day.

In addition, even after the completion of the conciliation, the Defendant voluntarily collected the sales proceeds of earth and sand at the site of civil construction works for the creation of housing sites conducted in D in the public city of official housing from June 2013, and thus, the obligation under the conciliation clause (1) was repaid.

Furthermore, the result of the above conciliation submitted false data as if the Defendant did not receive at all 118,643,750 won, even though the Defendant collected and recovered the input costs of the vehicle for the said construction from the guest soil price for three months from March 14, 2012, and deceiving the Plaintiff. This belongs to the Plaintiff.