1. The plaintiff C's lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff A and B's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s claim for construction price 1) Risk Construction Co., Ltd. (formerly, Small and Medium Enterprise Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., prior to the change, hereinafter “Daehan Construction”).

) On May 31, 2007, C&S E&I (hereinafter referred to as “C&S E&I”).

(3) The land listed in [Attachment 2] paragraphs (1) through (4) of [Attachment 2] owned by it (hereinafter “instant land”).

(A) the building described in paragraph (5) of the same list (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”).

2) A new construction project (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction project”)

A) A contract was made for construction cost of KRW 12,100,000,000, and on June 28, 2007, the Defendant’s structural construction of the fourth and sixth floors among the instant construction works (hereinafter “the instant structural construction”).

(2) The Defendant ordered that the instant construction contract will be terminated on November 13, 2008 on the ground that the bill issued on June 9, 2008 did not complete the construction of a part of the sixth floor of the instant building, which was due to the default on payment of the said bill, and the C&Ser notified that the instant construction contract will be terminated on the ground that it was done on November 13, 2008.

After that, the Defendant left 50 tons of steel bars, which were used as the site office and remaining materials of the instant aggregate construction, at the site of the instant construction, and entered the instant aggregate construction site in shift with the re-contractor who was awarded a subcontract for the instant aggregate construction from the Defendant, and managed the instant construction site.

3) On August 2, 2010, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the payment of the construction price against the Postal Construction and C&S E&I (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009Gahap128657, 2000, and rendered a favorable judgment against the non-litigation that ordered the payment of KRW 2,103,200,000, which is the full amount of the construction price, for the Postal Construction from the above court, but on the ground that the claims for the payment of the Postal Construction were all extinguished due to a set-off against the claims for the delayed payment for the Postal Construction.