1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On March 19, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a joint supply and demand agreement with the Yellow Total Construction Co., Ltd., and was awarded a contract for the expansion and packing of the roads between the Seocheon-si, Hocheon-si, Hocheon-si.

Western Construction Co., Ltd. is awarded a subcontract for one section of construction work, soil and reinforced concrete construction work (one construction work) and for one section of construction work, soil and structures (2 works) from among the joint contractors.

The defendant entered into a contract guarantee contract (total amount: KRW 418,360,000) and advance payment guarantee contract (total amount: KRW 493,152,00) with respect to subcontracted construction work.

Western Construction Co., Ltd. was performing subcontracted construction works and suspended construction works around October 20, 201.

On the other hand, on June 26, 2012, Yellow Construction Co., Ltd. withdrawn from the joint supply and demand company.

[Grounds for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 2-10, Eul 1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The key issue of the case is that the Defendant’s first return of advance payment to the Plaintiff before the lawsuit for claiming construction cost between the Seotong Co., Ltd and the Plaintiff was concluded is due to the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to exempt the Defendant from the obligation to pay the contract deposit.

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff merely withdrawn the claim provisionally after claiming the contract performance guarantee to the defendant, and that it does not ultimately waive the claim or exempt the defendant from the defendant's obligation.

The key issue of this case is whether the plaintiff exempted the defendant from the obligation to pay the contract deposit.

3. Judgment on the issue

A. The interpretation of the standard legal act is to clarify the objective meaning that the party gave to the display act.

Therefore, the objective meaning of the parties' internal deliberation should be reasonably interpreted regardless of what the parties agreed to do.

If the objective meaning is not clearly expressed by the language and text expressed by the parties, it is the form of such language and text.