보증금
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 1,497,70,000 and 718,960 among them.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, this is acceptable by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[Supplementary part] The judgment of the first instance court No. 16 of the judgment No. 16 of the first instance court is changed to “the judgment of the defendant’s assertion..... Judgment of the defendant’s assertion”
3-b) Reasons for the judgment of the first instance.
Part of the port (Articles 15, 13, 16, 15, 15, 15, 15, of the judgment of the court of first instance) shall be amended as follows:
The scope of guarantee liability (1) The so-called advance payment received in the contract for construction work is the pre-payment payment that the contractor pays the pre-payment to the contractor for the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the cost of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the cost of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the cost of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the cost of the pre-payment of the construction work, not the cost of the pre-payment of the construction work. If the pre-payment is returned in the pre-payment for reasons such as the cancellation or termination of the contract after the payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment of the pre-payment, unless the pre-payment is made as part of the cost of the pre-payment without a separate set-off declaration, and if the pre-payment is appropriated for the unpaid cost of the construction, the pre-payment will be limited to the pre-payment of the pre-payment. In light of the nature of the pre-payment payment, the pre-payment payment includes the amount equivalent to the pre-payment payment of the pre-payment.