1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, 4, Eul evidence 1, and Eul evidence 5:

From March 16, 2015 to March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff: the contract price of 162,400,000 won (including value-added tax) and the construction period of reinforced concrete construction works among the “Yeo-si Multi-Purpose River Extension Works” that the Defendant received from the Defendant from the Sung-si Office of Education in Seongbuk-si; and

5. A subcontract was awarded as of 15.

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). (b)

On March 31, 2015, the Plaintiff received respectively a performance guarantee insurance policy of KRW 16,240,000 from Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. and submitted to the Defendant an advance payment performance guarantee policy of KRW 20,000,000 for the amount of insurance coverage as the Defendant.

C. Around March 31, 2015, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 in advance.

On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) abandoned the construction of reinforced concrete according to the instant subcontract; and (b) drafted and issued a written waiver of construction to the Defendant, as of May 17, 2015, that as of May 17, 2015, the material cost, labor cost, equipment cost, and expenses incurred in excess of KRW 41,520,000 for progress payment (excluding value-added tax) shall be paid under the Plaintiff’s responsibility.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that, in the event that the Plaintiff commenced construction works as stipulated in the instant subcontract and performed construction works equivalent to KRW 41,520,000, the amount of progress payment, the Defendant did not have a duty to return the advance payment received from the Defendant, and that it is unreasonable for the Defendant to claim the insurance money to Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. based on the instant advance payment performance guarantee policy, and that the Plaintiff did not have a liability for indemnity against the Defendant for the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.

3. The conclusion of the judgment.