1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. On March 8, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that the construction contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) with respect to the electrical construction (hereinafter “instant electrical construction”) among the E-large repair works outside Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Jung-gu, Seoul and the construction period of KRW 1147,300,000,000 and the construction period from March 2, 2011 to June 30, 201.

After that, on May 4, 2011, Defendant B, the representative director of the non-party company, established F Co., Ltd. F (mutually Defendant A Co., Ltd., Ltd., and hereinafter “Defendant Company”), and accordingly, on May 13, 201, the Defendant Company succeeded to the status of the contractor of the said contract from the non-party company. At the time, Defendant B guaranteed all the obligations under the said contract against the Plaintiff of the non-party company.

Meanwhile, on April 1, 2011, the Plaintiff paid to Nonparty Company KRW 200,000,000 to Defendant Company and KRW 81.4 million on June 9, 2011.

Nevertheless, the Defendant Company did not complete the instant electrical construction by June 30, 201, which was due date for completion, and voluntarily suspended the construction on or around July 2011.

Therefore, the above contract was terminated due to the nonperformance of the obligation of the Defendant Company. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to waive all rights and rights to the remaining construction works and the construction cost already paid by the Plaintiff when the Defendant Company discontinues construction works for more than three days. As such, the Defendants are obligated to return advance payment KRW 280,140,000,000 and delay damages therefrom, whichever is already paid by the Plaintiff.

2. The judgment of the Defendant Company is the contractor of the instant electrical construction, and the fact that the instant electrical construction was interrupted from July 201 does not conflict between the parties.

Meanwhile, according to Gap evidence No. 4, the contractor is the defendant under Article 30 (Special Conditions) of the contract for the electrical construction of this case.