공사대금
1. The Defendant: (a) to the Plaintiff Dae Chang Construction Co., Ltd., and (b) to the Plaintiff Tae Chang Construction Co., Ltd., and (c) to the Plaintiff Sejong Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd., 576,929,692.
1. Basic facts
A. On April 17, 2001, the Plaintiffs organized a joint supply and demand organization with a joint implementation method, which is 7,624,238,000 won (including value-added tax) and each contract was concluded between April 23, 2001 to April 22, 2004 (hereinafter “instant contract agreement”) with the Defendant for the construction project ordered by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction project”). < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 17358, Apr. 23, 2001; Presidential Decree No. 17258, Apr. 22, 2004>
B. The contract amount, construction period, etc. was modified several times as indicated below.
The amended terms and conditions of the contract amount shall be from April 23, 2001 to April 201, 201, 15,217,45,00 won for the changed terms and conditions of contract on November 20, 208; 3,906, 225,000 won for the extended terms and conditions of work; 3,840,393,000 won for the 18,393,000 won for the 18,30,308,393,000 won for the 20,308,40. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 17015, Dec. 31, 2012; Presidential Decree No. 23588, Mar. 23, 2011; Presidential Decree No. 23568, Dec. 31, 201; Presidential Decree No. 24680, Mar. 36, 2013>
1) On May 22, 2001, the Defendant notified Plaintiff Dae Chang Construction of the suspension of the instant construction from May 23, 2001 on the ground of the delay in the purchase of land and the implementation of authorization and permission related to environmental review. The Plaintiffs suspended the said construction from May 23, 2001 (hereinafter “the first suspension of construction”).
2) On September 26, 2005, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff Dae Chang Construction of the suspension of the instant construction from September 26, 2005 on the ground of the delay in the purchase of land for the incorporated site A, and the Plaintiffs suspended the said construction from September 26, 2005.
(hereinafter referred to as “the second suspension of construction in this case”). After that, the Plaintiffs resumed the construction in November 15, 2007 at the Defendant’s request.
3. The defendant shall be on August 201.