1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as follows: (a) and (b) of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal under Paragraph (4)(a), (b), and (d) as stated in the following Paragraph (2). Thus,

(2) The part of the first instance court's judgment as to the scope of construction work is just and there is no error as alleged in the ground for appeal by the defendant) 2. The part of the second instance court's judgment as to the ground for appeal 2.

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay value-added tax only for KRW 36,215,748 of value-added tax purchase data issued by the Defendant, but there is no ground to deem that value-added tax to be paid to the Defendant is limited to purchase data issued by the Defendant.

- The Plaintiff acknowledged the additional construction cost of KRW 10 million and agreed to pay KRW 10 million with the Defendant for the additional construction cost and increase in the volume of the pipe water pipes, and the system change additional construction cost. However, in light of the circumstances in which the KRW 11,396,00 for the additional construction cost of the pipe water pipe, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s allegation.

(2) Direct payment labor cost: 251,090,000 won (=286,090,000 won - 35,000 won) - The Office of Education’s total labor cost directly paid to workers is KRW 286,090,000, and the above amount includes the wages of KRW 35,00,000 and the wages of 10,790,000 for workers of the business entity, including Q from the site agent, respectively.

(Nos. 15 and 16). - The Plaintiff is only the fourth insurance of the field agent under the instant special agreement.