1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff is revoked.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the amended portion as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. From 10th to 11th of the judgment of the first instance, the part to be modified is as follows.

“A) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements stated in Eul evidence Nos. 11, 14, 17 through 52, and 56 through 80, the following facts are as follows: (a) the Plaintiffs were trying to succeed to and proceed with the instant construction after the suspension of the instant construction; (b) the Defendant’s labor personnel and subcontractor requested the Plaintiffs to pay on behalf of the Plaintiffs labor cost, material cost, and equipment cost to be paid by the Defendant; (c) if the Plaintiffs refused the said request on behalf of the Plaintiffs, the on-site labor personnel would refuse the provision of materials, discontinue the provision of materials, and collect equipment, and Plaintiff Edi Integrated Construction paid the money to be paid by the Defendant to continue the instant construction; and (d) the Defendant’s labor personnel requested the payment of labor cost from November 1, 2014 to November 18, 2014, the Plaintiffs were deemed to have paid on behalf of the Plaintiffs as stated in the above evidence No. 1836, supra. 14.

Attached Form to those who have been entrusted with the representative for each process from those who have been requested by each person or individual;

1. 203,970,530 won in total, such as the Plaintiff’s statement of total labor cost on behalf of the Plaintiff, attached Form

2. The sum of KRW 235,609,280, as indicated in the Plaintiff’s statement of total labor cost calculation in October, respectively.