1. The Defendant’s KRW 130,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 25, 2015 to January 14, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On April 11, 2014, the Plaintiff is a building (A building; hereinafter “instant building”) newly built by the Defendant from the Defendant.

) Machines and equipment works (including consolidations, hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”) of the Company.

A) A contract was concluded between the two parties during the construction period of KRW 2,629,00,000, and the period of construction from April 11, 2014 to September 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) According to the instant contract, the Defendant agreed to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff as follows.

(1) Advance payment: Payment after a construction contract begins - (262,90,000 won: The intermediate payment after examination at the monthly base rate - The remainder amount of KRW 2,103,200,000: Payment after completion inspection - The remainder amount of KRW 262,90,000

B. On April 11, 2014, the Plaintiff subscribed to the employment insurance and industrial accident compensation insurance for the instant construction, and submitted the construction start system (the report on commencement of construction was accepted as of April 23, 2014). On April 14, 2014, the Plaintiff submitted a contract guarantee for advance payment under the instant contract to the Defendant. On June 26, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to produce freezing equipment, etc. to be installed in the instant building.

C. 1) On July 14, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the contract, stating that “Around July 14, 2014, an employee at the site of the Defendant operates a vehicle registered as the Plaintiff’s ownership, solely on the sole basis of the fact that the Defendant is running the vehicle, and thus, there is room for the Plaintiff to deem that there is another suspicion about the construction works and products when the Plaintiff continues to perform the construction works. Accordingly, the Defendant appears to be a clerical error in Articles 15(2) and 15(1)2 of the General Conditions of the instant contract.”

Article 15

1. In any of the following cases, the customer may unilaterally terminate this contract and the customer may enter into a contract: