1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, barring special circumstances, the defendant appealed against the whole judgment of the court of first instance, which acknowledged the defendant's defense of deduction of the above parts and transportation expenses, which the plaintiff should be deducted from the construction cost of KRW 46,00,000,00, which was not paid to the plaintiff, as to the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff appealed against the whole judgment of the court of first instance which acknowledged the defendant's defense of deduction of the above parts and transportation expenses, but did not dispute about KRW 28,210,946, which was admitted in the judgment of first instance

(See the legal brief dated March 7, 2017) KRW 17,789,054 (=46,00,000 - KRW 28,210,946) after deducting B, as well as the obligation to pay damages for delay.

3. Judgment as to the defendant's defense of mutual aid

A. In regard to this, the Defendant paid 32,425,266 won for parts to be borne by the Plaintiff under the instant construction contract, 51,93,500 won for equipment incurred in the process of relocating and installing soil washing facilities, and 7,000,200 won for repairing presses, and the Defendant asserts that there is no construction cost to be paid to the Plaintiff.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the written evidence Nos. 2 and 3 as to the determination on the grounds for the deduction of parts and the whole pleadings, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s total purchase cost of KRW 28,210,946 is KRW 32,425,266 in purchasing parts based on the drawing of the instant construction contract, but it is the KRW 18,700 under the evidence No. 3-16-16, which is KRW 187,000, KRW 39,600 under the evidence No. 3-22 of the evidence No. 3-3-2, KRW 396,496 under the evidence No. 3-41, KRW 490, and KRW 419,490 under the evidence No. 3-1 as to the erroneous calculation of KRW 4,190,946 in accordance with the amendment.

of this title. The fact that the payment was made may be recognized.

On the other hand, the plaintiff also purchased by the defendant.