1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Of the instant lawsuit, advance payment is made against the Defendant of Cheongdae Construction Co., Ltd.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 3, 2013, the Defendant concluded a contract for the instant construction project (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction project”) by setting the construction cost of KRW 270,650,00 and the construction period from May 8, 2013 to October 4, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”) between Cheongdae comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Cheongdae Construction”), and paid KRW 81,195,000 (hereinafter referred to as “instant advance payment”) as advance payment to Cheongdae Construction Co., Ltd. on May 29, 2013.

B. On May 10, 2013, in order to guarantee the repayment obligation of the foregoing advance payment that was paid under the instant contract, the Cheongdae Construction concluded an advance payment performance guarantee insurance contract with the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.”) with the Defendant and submitted to the Defendant an advance payment performance guarantee insurance policy issued by the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Guarantee Insurance”) with the purchase amount of the said advance payment to be returned to the Defendant due to the failure to perform the instant contract.

On the other hand, at the time of concluding the above advance payment performance guarantee insurance contract, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the liability for reimbursement to the Seoul Guarantee Insurance if the Seoul Guarantee Insurance pays the advance payment to the Defendant in accordance with the above advance payment performance guarantee insurance contract.

C. After entering into the instant contract, the construction did not immediately commence the instant construction, and even after receiving the Defendant’s demand for construction, the construction was not executed according to the construction schedule (as of July 17, 2013, the advance payment received was limited to less than 10% as of July 17, 2013) and the construction site employees did not use it for personnel expenses and material expenses, etc., and the construction site employees claimed labor expenses, such as molds and steel bars, to the Defendant, the contractor.

The defendant's name construction in this case.