1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 120 million to the Plaintiff; and (b) KRW 5% per annum from May 19, 2018 to June 27, 2018; and (c) the Plaintiff.

1. Recognizing the facts of recognition: The address of the design and construction site inside and outside the cartel range in B: the construction cost in Busan Dong-gu B: KRW 50 million (excluding value-added tax) - the construction cost shall be, at the defendant's request, determined by the method of payment for the progress rate of construction, and in principle, cash payment shall be made;

- Contract deposit of KRW 40 million (excluding value-added tax): 10% at the time of the contract and 2015 contract, which appears to be written in writing on May 31, 2016.

5. 31. - The intermediate payment (the first minute) 220 million won (excluding value-added tax): 40 percent and the adjustment shall be made after consultation.

- Part payments (second part) 200 million won (excluding value-added tax): 40% and after consultation, adjustment shall be made.

- The balance of KRW 70 million (excluding value-added tax): 10% after the completion of construction works, and the contract period of not more than 10 days: Compensation for delay: 2/100 of the construction cost per day for the number of delayed days, from May 31, 2016 to October 8, 2016 ( April 8):

A. On May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with the Defendant who conducts interior construction works, etc. on the design and construction works inside and outside the telecom outlet (the remodeling works of the existing fourth-story building, the extension works of the fifth floor, and the elevator extension works) with the following content:

(hereinafter “instant construction contract”). B.

On May 30, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a sum of KRW 40 million, which is KRW 20 million and KRW 20 million on May 31, 2016, as down payment, and thereafter paid KRW 80 million on August 2, 2016 at the Defendant’s request, as part of the intermediate payment.

C. After completion of a part of the removal works under the instant construction contract, the Defendant discontinued construction works from around August 2016 to around 10%.

Accordingly, on September 7, 2016, the Plaintiff deemed that there was no intention to proceed with the instant construction contract if he/she did not give the Defendant an answer to the instant construction contract by October 3, 2016. On October 8, 2016, the Plaintiff selected another company after performing the construction work and proceed with the legal procedure for the damages incurred therefrom.

‘A' sent content-certified mail that contains contents, but is not known to the addressee.