1. It is about KRW 20,280,060, which was deposited by Yong-gu District Court in Geum-gu District Court No. 474, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On January 15, 2013, the Plaintiff (formerly: Coastal Construction Co., Ltd.) was awarded a contract for B rearrangement projects (civil engineering works) located in Yong-gun, Young-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun for the construction cost of KRW 342,200,000. (2) On January 24, 2013, the Plaintiff awarded a contract to the Defendant for the construction cost of the said B rearrangement projects (hereinafter “instant construction works”) at KRW 140,000,000,000 and the construction period from January 24, 2013 to November 14, 2013.

3) The Defendant subcontracted the instant construction subcontracted by the Plaintiff to C again. 4) C ceased performing the instant construction by October 2013. The period between that time was 80%.

After that, the Defendant did not participate in the instant construction, and the Plaintiff performed the remainder of the construction.

B. A) On February 22, 2013, the Young-gun, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant agreed that “The Young-gun shall directly pay the subcontract price corresponding to the part performed by the Defendant during the instant construction work to the Defendant.” (2) The Defendant received KRW 121,902,250 in total from the Plaintiff or Young-gun until September 6, 2013 as the contract price for the instant construction work until September 6, 2013.

C. On December 5, 2014, the Young-gun District Court (Seoul District Court Decision 20,280,060,060 won (hereinafter “instant deposit”) was designated as the Plaintiff or Defendant on the ground that the creditors were unable to know who received a notification of suspension of the payment of the construction cost from the Plaintiff on the remaining deposit of the construction cost, and deposited the deposited money with the Plaintiff or Defendant as the Daegu District Court Young-gu District Court Young-gu Branch Branch Branch Branch Deposit KRW 474 (hereinafter “instant deposit”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, Gap 6 evidence 38, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, witness C's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it exceeds the construction cost of KRW 112,00,000 (=140,000 x 80 per cent) equivalent to 80 per cent of the time the Defendant ceased the instant construction work until the time when it ceases the construction work of this case.