According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on August 4, 1982, the court below concluded a contract between the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant, plaintiff hereinafter) for new construction of the instant leisure building, and decided that the construction cost shall be KRW 100,000,000, and the construction period shall be within 120 days from the commencement date of the construction. The plaintiff started construction on August 18, 1982 and completed completion inspection on March 25, 1983, exceeding 100 days from the contract period, and delivered the instant loan to the defendant, there is no dispute between the parties.

However, even after examining the records, the defendant recognized the fact that the plaintiff had undergone a completion inspection on March 25, 1983, but there is no trace that the defendant had received the entire building, and rather, in the preparatory documents on June 7, 1988 stated on the date of the 12th pleadings in the original judgment, it is recognized that the defendant claims that the plaintiff completed the construction other than the construction of the 64.8 square meters in the ground office of this case on August 10, 1984, and delivered it to the defendant only after completing the completion inspection as of the 14th day of that month after receiving the completion inspection.

Ultimately, the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff delivered the whole building, including the above underground section, to the defendant on March 25, 1983 is clearly disputed. Thus, the court below should determine the time of delivery based on evidence, but the court below has a reasonable ground to discuss this issue, since the defendant's wrong determination that the defendant led to confession is illegal.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below revoked the part of the judgment of the court of first instance ordering payment of the amount of 11,726,245 won and the amount of 5 percent per annum from September 26, 1983 to the date of full payment, and revoked the part ordering payment of the amount exceeding the amount of 5 percent per annum from September 26, 1983 to January 30, 1986, and the amount of 164,345 won among the part against the defendant's loss and the amount of 165 percent per annum from September 26, 1983 to the date of the judgment of the court of first instance.

However, if a significant portion of the amount cited by the judgment of the court of first instance was changed in the appellate court and the claim therefor was dismissed, barring special circumstances, the defendant's dispute over the existence or scope of the obligation to perform the construction works of this case in the appellate court can be seen as having considerable grounds, barring any special circumstance, ordering the above cited amount to pay damages at a rate of 25 percent per annum from the judgment of the court of first instance to the full payment after the judgment of the court of first instance is equivalent to the statutory interpretation of Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion,

3. Ultimately, since the above judgment of the court below constitutes the ground for reversal under Article 12(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the part against the defendant among the judgment below shall be reversed and remanded. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)