1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 25, 2006, between the Defendant Company and the Plaintiff Company, the construction amount of KRW 29,697,800,000 (the last change was made to KRW 37,815,800,000 during the construction period) and the construction period from October 25, 2006 to November 11, 201, the Plaintiff Company entered into a construction subcontract with the Defendant Company that “the tunnel and the structure among the road construction works between Jung-Eup/Seoul-si (C Section)” (hereinafter “instant construction subcontract”) that the Plaintiff Company would receive the instant construction subcontract from the Defendant Company (hereinafter “the instant construction subcontract”). Of the written subcontract agreement for the construction works, the said portion is indicated as “the payment column for the payment of the construction amount: one month; and within 60 days from the date of receipt of the object.”

B. Since the commencement of the instant construction work on October 25, 2006, the Plaintiff Company filed a claim for payment of the progress payment with the Defendant Company from time to time, and each time the Defendant Company paid the payment to the Plaintiff Company after the completion payment is finalized.

C. On August 31, 2012, the Plaintiff Company filed a claim with the Defendant Company for the payment of KRW 66,00,000 (including value-added tax; hereinafter “instant progress payment”) for the 63rd progress payment (including value-added tax), and the Defendant Company notified the Plaintiff Company of its determination of the above progress payment on the same day. Accordingly, the Plaintiff Company issued a tax invoice for the above progress payment to the Defendant Company at that time.

After that, on October 11, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures (hereinafter “instant decision to commence rehabilitation procedures”) with respect to the Defendant Company as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012 Ma84, the Plaintiff Company reported the instant claim to the progress payment as a rehabilitation claim in the aforementioned rehabilitation procedures on November 14, 2012. Accordingly, the instant claim to the progress payment became final and conclusive as the rehabilitation claim because the Defendant Company’s custodian, etc. did not raise any objection thereto.

E. The administrator of the Defendant Company, on February 14, 2013, is a “Plaintiff Company” under Article 119(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.