1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for “the parts to be modified” under paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) “Partial Testimony of Witness F and G” in Part 3 of Part 1 and Part 3 of Part 18 to 19 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be deemed “F of the first instance trial witness F of the first instance trial and part of G”, respectively, and the “Witness F of the first instance trial” in Part 5, 9, and 5 shall be deemed “F of the first instance trial.”

B. On the 5th judgment of the first instance court, the term “the instant steelworks” in the 16th, 18th, and 19th, respectively, shall be read as “the instant steelworks”.

(c) Decision 2-C. of the first instance court.

The part of the "hump" (from No. 6 to No. 16) shall be filled with as follows:

“The instant construction contract is valid according to the theory of lawsuit. The Plaintiff completed the instant steel framed construction on or around December 24, 2012, and the Defendant agreed to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff within 20 days after the completion of the instant steel framed construction as seen earlier. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is a person who has received the payment from the Defendant for the construction price of KRW 10 million. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the construction price to the Plaintiff (=26.5 million won - KRW 236.5 million - KRW 10 million) and damages for delay from January 14, 2013 to the date following the agreed payment date of the construction price.”

(d) Paragraph 3 of the first instance court's decision "judgments on the defendant's assertion" (Articles 6, 17, 7, and 11) shall be followed as follows.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion (1) between the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the I Regional Housing Association, the contractor of the instant construction, (hereinafter “Inward Association”), are exempt from the Defendant’s obligation to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff.