1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 16, 201, the Plaintiff obtained permission for the construction and development of a factory from the Kimcheon-si to the Seocheon-si Kim Jongcheon-si, Seoul, for the construction and development of a factory on the non-public parcel other than the 47-2 and four parcels.

B. On December 14, 201, the Plaintiff awarded a contract for the construction to construct a factory site on June 30, 2012 (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the construction cost of KRW 513,00,000,000, and on June 30, 2012, the Plaintiff paid a down payment of KRW 46,70,000 to the Defendant around that time.

C. On January 12, 2012, the Plaintiff was ordered to suspend the construction of a stone embankment by Kimcheon-si on the ground that the part constructed of a stone embankment differs from the retaining wall originally obtained permission. The Plaintiff filed an application for change of the construction, and obtained permission for change of development activities on January 31, 2012.

On February 23, 2012, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant construction contract will be terminated if the Plaintiff did not settle the accounts by February 29, 2012, while demanding the payment of the progress payment of KRW 62,030,000. The instant construction contract was suspended around that time.

E. On June 14, 2012, the Defendant filed an application for provisional seizure of real estate with respect to the instant construction cost of KRW 62,030,000 as the claimed amount, and this court cited it on June 15, 2012.

(The grounds for recognition) The facts of absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 10 (including each number, if any, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff did not work within the deadline for completion, and applied for provisional seizure of real estate against the plaintiff's real estate although the plaintiff did not have a claim for construction price against the plaintiff, which constitutes a tort that damages the plaintiff's credit.

Therefore, the defendant's damages amounting to KRW 62,030,00 due to illegal provisional attachment and KRW 112,347,00 for liquidated damages plus KRW 46,70,00 for liquidated damages, 221,07,00 for liquidated damages, deducting KRW 47,568,854 from KRW 173,50 for liquidated damages and KRW 47,568,146 for liquidated damages.