A. On April 7, 2011, the Defendant awarded a contract for D new construction on a lot, other than C, at Jeju, for the construction of Macling Integrated Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Macling Construction”).

The term of completion under the contract was extended on May 30, 2012 while the construction of beer construction was in progress, and the construction was waived in July 2012 without completing the construction even after May 30, 2012.

At the time, the defendant and Mack Construction agreed on the construction cost of the 500 million won.

B. The Defendant directly performed part of the construction work such as electricity, fire fighting, etc., and contracted the remaining construction work to the Plaintiff on February 19, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). C.

On April 30, 2013, the Plaintiff continued the remaining construction works and suspended the payment of the construction cost, such as the Defendant’s down payment and the progress payment.

The highest rate of the construction period before the plaintiff commences the remaining construction works is 37.40%, and the highest rate of construction period at the time when the plaintiff suspends construction works around April 30, 2013 is 50.98% when the whole construction works are based.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 9, Eul evidence No. 1-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Upon the conclusion of the instant contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined the construction cost as KRW 2.12 billion, including value added tax, and the Plaintiff, upon completion of the construction work, received approximately KRW 1.4 billion, excluding the construction cost paid by the Defendant to be paid from the relevant construction cost.

In addition, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to pay the down payment amounting to KRW 212 million immediately after the defendant raised funds, and the down payment amount shall be paid on the basis of the rate of the base price for each month.

The instant contract was rescinded upon the lapse of time after the discontinuance of the Plaintiff’s construction work, and even if not, the Plaintiff’s delivery of a copy of the instant complaint on the grounds of the Defendant’s failure to pay the construction cost.