공사대금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff (appointed) and the designated parties equivalent to the amount ordered to be paid below.
1. The reasoning for this part of the underlying facts is as follows, and this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial revision as follows. A. This is citing it in accordance with
The third 13 parties of the judgment of the first instance have concluded the "Concluding the contract" (hereinafter "the contract of this case").
B. The following is added between the lower court’s 10 parallels and 11 parallels at the sixth bottom of the judgment of the first instance.
“The Plaintiff et al. of the Plaintiff et al. of the Plaintiff et al., not included in the instant subcontract before the completion of the instant construction works: ① the construction of a temporary line Ma2 division; ② the construction of an electronic transmission system at the time of each phase; ③ the construction of a temporary crossing (I); ④ the construction of a signal system at each phase; ④ the alteration of the operation of a temporary line (J and I Station); ⑤ the operation of a vessel within the K-L station (the alteration of the operation of a bus line between K-L); 6 the construction of an additional wall for a tunnel/bridge, etc. (hereinafter each additional construction is referred to as “additional construction”; and 1-6 additional construction in total, “the instant additional construction”.
(i) "";
C. At the sixth bottom of the judgment of the first instance, “E. E.” is “..” and “E. f.” at the bottom of the same side is respectively “G.”.
The following shall be added to the 7th part of the judgment of the first instance.
“The above appellate court determined that the Defendant D had a duty to pay additional construction costs on the ground that there was a cause attributable to the design modification in this part with respect to the 1-3 additional construction works, while it held that the said appellate court did not have a duty to pay additional construction costs to the Republic of Korea on the ground that there was a cause attributable to the design modification in this part.”
E. The 7th day of the judgment of the court of first instance was determined as “a final and conclusive” (hereinafter “litigation related to price fluctuation”).
F. 8 pages 1 to 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.
“A dispute over the grounds for recognition.”