A. On March 2, 2011, the Defendant subcontracted earth and sand from HyundaiM Co., Ltd. during the period of Category B (3), and re-subcontracted the blasting construction to the Plaintiff.

B. On March 4, 2011, the Plaintiff submitted a written estimate to the Defendant with the following content.

The unit blasting unit price (won) of the separate size 1 general blasting unit 3,000 cubic metres 3,000 cubic metres Control (large scale) 3,000 cubic metres 3,000 cubic metres 8,600 cubic metres 4,600 cubic metres 2,500,000 5 powders handling and authorization expenses

C. The Plaintiff completed the blasting construction work by May 5, 201, and received a total of KRW 584,084,014 from the Defendant as the payment for the said blasting construction work until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 5-1, 2, Eul evidence 7-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. As to the Plaintiff’s on-site volume 171,194.4 cubic meters, the Plaintiff completed the blasting construction work by applying the detailed vibration emission method to the mid-scale vibration emission method; as to the volume 29,668.4 cubic meters in the vicinity of D factories, the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total price of KRW 184,647,426 [the remainder of the construction cost by applying the unit price stated in the estimate as of March 4, 2011, 184,647, and 426 [the Co-site volume 171,194.4 x the mid-scale vibration emission method x 3,00 won in the middle-scale vibration emission method x 29,68.4 x 4 x 868.4 x x 2984,000 won in the close vibration emission method x 204,084,014 x 2964,000 cubic meters in each of the construction cost.

3. Determination

A. The volume of the instant blasting construction in total is 200,862.8 cubic meters 171,194.4 cubic meters 29,668.