2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. 1) The Defendant’s assertion regarding the claim for the return of construction cost is that the instant construction contract should be completed pursuant to the instant construction contract, but the Defendant did not perform its obligations until now. The Defendant rescinded the instant construction contract on the ground of the Plaintiff’s nonperformance. Since the completed portion of the instant construction contract is merely a construction waste and does not benefit the Defendant, the instant construction contract was entirely rescinded, including the original part of the construction contract, due to the Defendant’s declaration of intent to rescind. The Plaintiff is obligated to return KRW 60,000,000,000, which was paid to the Defendant due to the cancellation. 2) In the construction contract, even if the construction contract was terminated and completed, even if there were parts during the construction contract, the restoration was considerably significant social and economic losses and the completed part becomes beneficial to the contractor, and the contractor is delivered the contractor, and the contractor is obligated to deliver the building that was rescinded to the contractor, and the contractor is obligated to pay remuneration for the building that was delivered to the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da3645497.

① On March 28, 1995, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract for the instant construction work with the Defendant at KRW 211,200,000, but failed to complete the construction.

(2) Results of appraisal conducted in the first lawsuit shall be December 22, 1997.