1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 18, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on construction works with the Defendant to receive a contract, setting the construction cost of KRW 130,420,000 for the block type reinforcement and retaining wall on the ground C (hereinafter “instant construction works”) from October 28, 2013 to December 20, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board for arbitration seeking payment of the construction cost related to the instant construction contract with the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board under Article 1511-0019, and the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board, an incorporated association, made an arbitral award as stated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”) on July 21, 2015. The said arbitral award was served on the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above findings of finding as to the cause of the claim, compulsory execution based on the arbitral award of this case shall be permitted in accordance with Articles 38 and 37(1) of the Arbitration Act unless there exist grounds for setting aside the arbitral award under Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act.

B. As to the defendant's assertion and judgment, the defendant asserts that the construction work of this case has defects such as changes in retaining wall block and ruptures in reinforcement soil, etc., and that construction work need to be built less than the area agreed by the plaintiff to settle the construction cost again.

In light of the above, the arbitral award has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment between both parties (Article 35 of the Arbitration Act). Thus, unless there is no ground for revocation under Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act, the court, upon receipt of a request for the recognition of the arbitral award and the judgment of execution, has no authority to review and determine the propriety of the substantive

The grounds alleged by the Defendant are substantially related to the contents and conclusion of the instant arbitral award, and thus, are contrary to res judicata, and there is no assertion or proof that there exists a ground for revoking the arbitral award under Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act.