2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Since the defendant appealed only for the part of the counterclaim claim in the judgment of the court of first instance, the subject of adjudication of this court is limited to the part of the defendant's counterclaim claim.

2. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination on the cause of the counterclaim

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The term of construction work of this case is 65.91% as of January 25, 2016, as of April 30, 2016, and 68.98% as of April 25, 2016, and as of April 30, 2016, the Defendant incurred the construction work of this case until the end of March 2016. As such, the term of time and the rate of interest at that time can be presumed to be 67.98%. The construction work cost that the Plaintiff is obliged to pay to the Defendant may be presumed to be 236,498,861 (i.e., the agreed total construction cost of KRW 347,894,765 (x high rate of KRW 67.98%) and, even if the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay 8,300,000 won paid to the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant, 9,407,479 and 757.7.7

B. As to the judgment 1 rate, the instant construction contract is deemed a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant that the Defendant executes and completes the construction work as a stone provided by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff should pay KRW 347,894,765 to the Defendant in return.

If the contractor has to settle the construction cost on the basis of the completed construction contract with the cancellation of the construction contract without completion, the completed part and the non-construction.