1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff claimed that, around July 2004, the construction cost claim for the Dong Mine Housing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dong Mine Housing”) would be KRW 280,000,000,000 for the construction cost that was not paid after being awarded a contract for the construction of the D Building on 14 lots other than the Gu-U.S., and on January 28, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Daegu District Court Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, Seoul District Court for the payment order as KRW 2015,121, and on January 28, 2015, the above court received an order to pay the Plaintiff KRW 280,00,000 and its amount from August 12, 2004 to February 3, 2015, the payment order was finalized annually from the next day to the date of full payment, and the payment order was finalized by the rate of KRW 200,000 per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

On November 27, 2014, the deposit of the Dong Mine Housing and the transfer of the right to claim deposit housing construction were deposited KRW 363 million with E as the guarantee of the suspension of compulsory execution (the Jeonju District Court 2014Kaga361) by filing a lawsuit of objection against E under the Jeonju District Court 2014Kahap11859.

(Seoul Central District Court (Seoul District Court No. 27311). On November 27, 2014, the Housing Construction entered into a contract with the Defendant to transfer to the Defendant the right to claim for recovery of deposit money of KRW 363 million deposited as above (hereinafter “instant claim for recovery of deposit”). On December 3, 2014, the said contract was notified that Korea transferred the right to claim for recovery of deposit money of this case to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 6 (including virtual numbers), and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings has a claim for construction cost against the Dong Mine Housing, so the plaintiff has a preserved claim, and it is the only property of Dong Mine Housing which has been in excess of the debt.