2. A corrected or added portion;

A. The following are amended: 7 pages 1 to 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

According to the following circumstances, prior to the deduction of subsidies for direct payments prior to the conclusion of the instant modified contract, and the statements in the Evidence No. 3, No. 1, 8, 10-12, which can be seen by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant Hasung Housing calculated the progress payment for the previous construction works at the time of the conclusion of the instant modified contract at KRW 38,9750,000, which was paid to the Plaintiff’s employees, and omitted the labor cost of KRW 39.66 million and the safety management cleaning cost of the omitted labor cost of KRW 709,000 from the construction cost of the instant case.

The Defendants’ assertion is with merit.

① On March 28, 2014, Defendant Daeung Construction paid KRW 709,00 as safety management cleaning costs to the Plaintiff’s re-subcontractor or two other persons, and KRW 430,119,000 as construction cost under the instant construction contract, to the workers belonging to the Plaintiff, who worked for steel bars, fielding airs, airsings, and molds at the construction site of this case, on October 1, 2014, and paid KRW 1360,1360,00 as labor cost to the Plaintiff and its subcontractor, workers, etc. by November 6, 2015, by November 6, 2015.

② However, upon entering into the instant modified contract with the Plaintiff on January 6, 2015, Defendant 1 entered into the instant modified contract with the Plaintiff, adjusted the construction cost of Defendant 1’s paid up to 38,9750,000,000 won, thereby omitting KRW 40,369,000 and labor cost of KRW 39.66 million.

③ The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant Dai Construction was conducting a separate construction and paying 39.66 million won as labor cost.