2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff received each contract from the Defendant for the construction of a facility for the elderly and children located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the “date of commencement: August 16, 2013”; “Scheduled date of completion: December 31, 2013”; and “57,500,000 won in the contract amount”; respectively.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

In accordance with the above contract, the Plaintiff commenced the instant construction on September 9, 2013, and completed the building with the size of five stories above ground and 472.61 square meters above ground (hereinafter “instant building”), and obtained approval for the use of the said building on March 14, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff asserted that at the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff changed the use of the first floor to the parking lot on August 2013, 201, the first floor on which the first floor was changed to 2,3, and 4 stories on the first design, and changed to 2,3, and the first three floors on the design to 4th, each of which was 472.61 square meters in total floor area (five floors if the building includes the stairs and equipment room) and then changed to 4th, each of which was 47.61 square meters in total floor area of the existing design drawings (five floors). Accordingly, the Plaintiff was obligated to pay additional construction costs equivalent to 147,819,000 won, which was not scheduled at the time of the instant contract as indicated in the attached Table, and completed the change of use to the facilities for the elderly. Accordingly, the Defendant claimed that the Plaintiff, upon the Plaintiff’s request, should be obligated to pay additional construction costs of KRW 119,237,595.

Accordingly, contrary to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant already changed the design from the third floor to the fourth floor at the time of concluding the contract of this case. Since no substantial change was made after the conclusion of the contract of this case, the Plaintiff’s assertion is unreasonable.

3. Determination Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5.