1. The following facts are not in dispute between the parties, or are acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3, and Eul evidence No. 2, and there are no counter-proofs.

On May 16, 201, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to additionally receive construction cost of KRW 28,200,000 for the portion of the instant housing first floor and approximately 10 square meters for the additional construction work of approximately 300,000 square meters for the first floor and the first floor of the neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Defendant, who entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to conclude a contract for the construction work of KRW 300,000 for the construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. On December 21, 201, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction project including the said additional construction portion, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation on January 4, 2012.

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the principal claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 328,200,000,000, including the above additional construction cost (=28,200,000,000) less the remainder of KRW 303,20,000,000 for a person who was already paid by the Plaintiff, and the delay damages therefrom.

3. Determination on a defense and a counterclaim against a claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The defendant's assertion that his damage claim against the plaintiff is set off against the plaintiff's obligation to pay the remainder of the construction work and the equivalent amount, and the remaining damages are claimed against the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's judgment on the legitimacy of the part of the claim for damages equivalent to the defect repair appraisal fee among the counterclaim of this case alleged that the plaintiff should pay the appraisal fee of KRW 4,500,000 to the court for the defect appraisal in the lawsuit of this case, but the above appraisal fee paid by the defendant.