1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this part of the underlying facts is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance (from 18 to 4.7 pages), except in the following cases. Thus, this Court’s explanation is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The third 8th h through 12th am the following.

“2) The construction cost of the instant contract is indicated as follows:

The fourth seven-party 7th judgment of the first instance court is "this court" as "court of the first instance."

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is liable to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 126,52,537, which deducts KRW 890,813,800 as stated in paragraph (2) from the amount of KRW 1,017,336,337 as stated in paragraph (1) below, and damages for delay.

1) The Defendant agreed to separately pay value-added tax on the construction cost stipulated in the instant contract with the Plaintiff. Therefore, the construction cost corresponding to the part already constructed by the Plaintiff under the instant contract is KRW 798,315,848 (total construction cost 1,961,464,00 x value-added 1.1 x 37%). ② The Plaintiff, while carrying out the instant construction project, added the construction cost of KRW 131,970,609 in total to the Plaintiff, such as waterway and erosion block construction (i.e., construction cost), and construction cost of KRW 30,973,333 candidate construction (i.e., part of the building cost of the instant contract, 91,343,964) to the Plaintiff.