공사대금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,203,630 as well as 5% per annum from April 17, 2014 to May 16, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
A. The Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since there is no particular reason to settle the construction cost of the above two factories in a lump sum.
C. According to the detailed construction cost calculation 1) Gap 21 and 22 evidence, appraiser F’s appraisal result, and fact-finding results of this court’s appraiser of this case’s construction work, direct construction cost for the part executed by the plaintiff among the instant construction work is as follows.
The Defendant’s testimony-processing construction cost No. 427.2 1,276,046 2 m2 m2,50 m2,770 m2,50 m243 m2,55 m2,586 m2,50 m2,570 m2,570 m2,570 m2,50 m219,290 m2,691,348 m295 m2,5 m26 m2,50 m2,57 m2,57 m2,50 m2,000 m2,76 m2,000 m2,06 m2,000 m2,000 m2,06 m2,000 m2,000 m27,000 m2,000