1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,802,00 as well as 6% per annum from April 29, 2012 to January 15, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 26, 2010, the Plaintiff (former name: Yangyang Integrated Construction Co., Ltd.) entered into a contract for construction works between the Defendant and the contract amounting to KRW 2,249,95,80 with respect to the construction works of the 154k-V High Power Station (hereinafter “instant construction works”). From November 30, 2010 to January 23, 2012, the instant construction works commenced on November 30, 2010.

B. On September 1, 2011, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the construction work of “to suspend construction work on the floor, which is a type of work in which material damage, reconstruction, etc. is anticipated, as a result of the overlap with the soil construction work at the time of bringing in and installing a transformation cycle period,” and the Plaintiff suspended construction work according to the Defendant’s direction.

C. On November 1, 2011, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of “the construction shall resume the construction on October 28, 201, as the transformation cycle was installed in entirety,” and the Plaintiff resumed the construction.

On December 6, 2011, the date of completion of the construction works between January 23, 2012 and March 21, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the alteration of construction works, which was changed from January 23, 2012 to March 21, 201. On December 30, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the alteration of construction works with the Defendant as KRW 2,249,95,80 from KRW 80 to KRW 2,172,469,20 from KRW 44,491,60 from KRW 434,493,840 from KRW 440 from KRW 449,91,60, KRW 20 from KRW 2,172,469, KRW 200 from KRW 200 to KRW 137,157,000.

E. On April 3, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the adjustment of the contract amount due to the change of indirect expenses for air extension. On April 23, 2012, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to pay additional construction costs with the purport that the contract amount should be adjusted due to the change in the terms of the contract, such as extension

On April 12, 2012, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the completion price.

F. Of the general terms and conditions of construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the content of the instant case is as follows.

Article 20 (Adjustment of Contract Price according to Modification of Design) (1).