2. After an appeal is filed.

A. Upon receipt of an order from E.S. Construction, the Defendant subcontracted to the National Highway Construction Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the “National Highway Construction”), ① Section 1 of A.S. redevelopment apartment construction among the redevelopment apartment construction works in Zone 3 (hereinafter the “First Construction”), ② damping construction from among the construction works of apartment complexes in Zone 3 (hereinafter the “Second Construction”), and ② detailed construction works from among the construction works of apartment complexes in Zone 2 Zone 3 (hereinafter the “Second Construction”), and collectively, the first and second construction works (hereinafter the “each construction works”).

B. On October 31, 2012, the Plaintiff determined construction costs as KRW 189,59,59,51,859 with respect to “B” among the National Highway Construction Department and “B” among the Construction Work, and (2) concluded a so-called “Quantities-lurging” contract with respect to “B” among the Second Construction Work on March 2013, which determined construction costs as KRW 148,038,30, and according to each of the said quantities-lurging contract (Article 8), the Plaintiff determined that the final settlement shall be based on the actual quantity, as the quantity and amount specified in the specifications may be increased or decreased.”

C. Since April 2013, the construction of national highways was unable to pay wages and material costs normally, and there was an event where on-site workers, including the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff, would punish farming.

Therefore, even though the Defendant urged the construction of national highways to solve the problem such as overdue wages, the situation where the on-site workers occupy the office was occurred on October 31, 2013, the Defendant eventually cancelled each of the instant construction contracts as of November 1, 2013, and terminated each of the instant construction contracts by settling the national highways construction and the unpaid construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (if any, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply); the fact-finding with respect to the specialized construction mutual aid association of the first instance court; the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the following grounds: (a) total of KRW 146,01,450 (i.e., wages, etc. for which national highways were not paid to the Plaintiff (= KRW 33,317,400 related to the 2nd construction) and damages for delay.