The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim on the principal lawsuit is dismissed.

(b).

2. Determination on the main claim

A. According to the above facts in determining the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid service payment of KRW 56,525,600 and damages for delay, barring special circumstances.

B. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion is that the COS management plan was established at the time of entering into the contract of this case and the cost was set accordingly, and the part that the plaintiff did not work as originally planned is equivalent to KRW 34,425,00,00, as stated in the attached Table "the grounds for calculation of the non-execution of the forest landscape," and thus, the above amount should be naturally deducted from the service cost of this case. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff did not perform the service contract of this case equivalent to the above amount, and there is

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above argument.

C. Accordingly, the plaintiff shall have a claim for the amount of 56,525,600 won payable to the defendant as well as damages for delay. However, as seen below, the plaintiff's claim for the service payment was set off against the defendant's claim for counterclaim within the scope of equal amount with the defendant's claim for counterclaim. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for the principal claim is without merit.

3. Determination on the counterclaim and the counterclaim of set-off

A. 1) The Defendant’s assertion that the counterclaim claim was based on an agreement that the Plaintiff would compensate the Plaintiff when the equipment and expendable items are damaged due to the Plaintiff’s mistake.

However, there is a problem.