2. The costs of the retrial shall be the plaintiff-Counterclaim defendant.

B. On September 25, 2006, the Defendant’s religious organization C church on September 25, 2006 (hereinafter “C church”).

(2) In accordance with the estimates and design documents prepared by the Defendant prior to entering into the said contract, the heating and cooling facility construction works included in the said new construction works, among the said new construction works, were scheduled to be a sti (B.C.T.) and an electronic control method (hereinafter referred to as “non-sti method”) from October 10, 2006 to October 30, 2007.

3) On December 2007, the Defendant uses electricity differently from the initial plan for the construction of air-conditioning and heating facilities (E.H.P.) and anti-Automatic control methods (hereinafter “e.g., e., transfer method”).

(2) The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff agreed on the construction period from December 17, 2007 to March 10, 2008 and the construction cost of KRW 455,00,000 (including value-added tax) and the subcontract owner of the said machinery and equipment works to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

(4) Around December 17, 2007, the Plaintiff started construction of the above machinery and equipment and completed it in the middle order on July 2008, and the heating and cooling facility construction was actually executed by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

B. On April 21, 201, the Plaintiff, as a final judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for confirmation of the existence of an obligation against the Defendant on the grounds that it was not responsible for the defect in air conditioners construction at the above heating and cooling facilities construction by 201Da15622, and subsequently amended the purport of the claim as stated in the main part of the above purport of the claim on October 11, 201, and the Defendant continued to file the lawsuit. < Amended by Act No. 11483, Oct. 21, 2012>