2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On September 27, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the Defendant for electrical construction works of Han River Watershed 3-2 (hereinafter “instant construction works”) of KRW 231,00,000 (including value-added tax) for the said construction works. From September 2013, the Plaintiff continued the said construction works.

B. In concluding the said subcontract, the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the price for the completed portion of the construction work performed by the Plaintiff within seven days from the date of receiving the price from the ordering Party A.

C. On November 18, 2013, the Plaintiff terminated the instant construction contract to the Defendant, and sent a document stating that the construction price for the ingredients in September shall be until November 29, 2013; the construction price for the ingredients in October shall be until December 11, 2013; and the price for the ingredients in November shall be paid until January 11, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 through 12 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap witness B's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the evidence in the judgment on the grounds of the claim, it is recognized that the Plaintiff constructed a construction on the part of the 1-3-1 man-one man-one man-company among the instant construction works, and the construction cost was KRW 9,151,244 (excluding value-added tax), and that the Plaintiff constructed a construction on the part of the man-3-3 man-company man-general, and that the construction cost was KRW 2,157,398 (excluding value-added tax).

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total amount of 12,439,506 won (2,154 won) x value added tax 1.1 = 12,439,506 won (2,157,398 won) x value added tax 1.1 = 12,439,506 won (hereinafter “the construction price of this case”) and delay damages.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant settled the construction cost that the Plaintiff had not received on January 3, 2014 at KRW 35,300,000 (excluding value-added tax) on the part of the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff Company Ehybro Co., Ltd., Ltd., from Ehybro.