2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a person who operates a swine farm under the trade name of “C farm” in Yongcheon-si B. The Plaintiff is a company that intends to engage in the business of manufacturing, processing, and selling agricultural, livestock products, and the design and construction business of livestock excreta treatment facilities, etc. (2) around 2011, the Plaintiff received instructions from public officials in charge of Youngcheon-si to induce the installation of livestock excreta treatment facilities. On August 2, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant Seas to provide subsidies of KRW 100 million for each facility, the construction cost of KRW 160,000 (subsidies KRW 100,000,000,000,000 won), the commencement date of construction work on August 5, 2011, the completion date of construction work on October 30, 201, and the defect repair period of construction work on KRW 00,000,000,000,000 of the instant construction contract (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”).

[A] Defendant Seah’s contract against Defendant Seah’s 5 did not relate to the instant construction contract, but rather to the instant construction contract, and was executed separately from the instant construction contract by separating the contract details for the remainder of KRW 100 million after the Plaintiff performed construction work, such as installation of liquid manure storage tank. As such, Defendant Seah’s new construction contract did not include any broken-off pumps at which the cost of repair of defects is at issue in this case. However, in full view of each description of subparagraphs 1 and 5, and the purport of the entire argument as to witness D’s testimony, the aforementioned two construction contract (Articles. 1 and 5).