1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Grounds for claim;

A. The Plaintiff Tae-Gyeong Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Tae-Gyeong Construction”) is a corporation that runs the construction business, etc., and the Plaintiff A is a person who runs the construction business under the trade name of “C”.

B. On March 27, 2012, Plaintiff Taesung Construction was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction period of “Seongsung-si Land Creation Project” by setting the construction period from April 1, 2012 to June 30, 2012, and the construction cost of KRW 220,000,000 (including value-added tax).

C. From among the above land development works, the Plaintiff Thai-Gyeong Construction subcontracted the Plaintiff with the retaining wall construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work.

The construction cost of the instant construction project is KRW 185,810,000.

E. The Plaintiff Thai Construction transferred KRW 185,810,000 to the Plaintiff for construction cost of the instant construction project.

The Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 185,00,000 out of the construction price of the instant construction work to the Plaintiff, if the assignment of the above assignment of the claim becomes effective selectively, and if the assignment of the claim is not effective, to the Plaintiff A.

2. Determination

A. The defendant's assertion on the grounds of the plaintiffs' claim is as follows.

1. The Plaintiffs shall comply with the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Framework Act on the Construction Industry while performing the instant construction work.

Nevertheless, the plaintiffs arbitrarily performed the construction of this case without obtaining the permission of Ansan City.

Ansan-si requested correction of an illegal building after July 2012, and the defendant requested correction from the plaintiff Tae-si Construction, but the plaintiff Tae-si Construction did not make any correction.

As a result, there was a complaint against the instant construction works for reasons of violation of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, and the Building Act, and the cut part of the retaining wall construction by receiving an order for restoration of illegal form and quality change was restored to the original state of the construction transfer.

As such, the Plaintiffs are the instant construction works.