2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On January 26, 2018, with respect to D Corporation located in Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant construction”) from C Co., Ltd., the Defendant received monthly payments on the basis of the volume installed at KRW 12,000 per meter (including Haok UP and T) in the scope of services in accordance with the terms of service scope ARU/S, SRU/TTU, RHDS, RHDS, UTP, and UT&O PP.

B. Upon re-subcontracting the instant construction from the Defendant, the Plaintiff performed total of 30,239 meters, including 24,596 meters and CON work 5,643 meters.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Eul evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff is obligated to pay 30,00,000 won (=24,596m x 12,000 won) to the defendant, and CON's 24,596m PIT work and 5,634m CON work per meter. The plaintiff agreed to pay 30,00,000 won to the plaintiff as additional cost when the existing PIT and CON had been removed as a result of moving pipelines installed in the existing pipe facilities to another place. Thus, the defendant did not have a duty to pay 35,662,00 won (24,596m x 12,00 won) to the plaintiff (5,634m x 15,000 won) to the 35,630,6000,000 won or more, and the defendant did not have an additional obligation to pay CON work at the cost of 1600,000 won.

B. Based on the reasoning of the evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the lower court agreed to pay KRW 12,000 per meter for PIT work and for CON work to pay KRW 15,000 per meter for PIT work in excess of the unit price for 10,000 per CON work which the Defendant recognized.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff at the expense of reworking, and otherwise, it is different.