1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) From the Defendants on August 2013, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) from the firstman on the ground of the ground of the Plaintiff Kimhae-si, the Chohae-si Construction Corporation (hereinafter “instant Corporation”).

(2) After receiving a subcontract for construction cost of KRW 19,90,000, the Plaintiff completed the said construction from August 7, 2013 to October 11, 2013. (2) After receiving a subcontract for additional construction cost of KRW 1,460,000 from the Defendants, the Plaintiff received a subcontract for additional construction cost of KRW 1,460,00 from the said Defendants. The said construction was completed from November 8, 2013 to November 11, 2013.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendants purchased materials necessary for each of the above construction works at the Plaintiff’s expense and carried out construction works, and subsequently, the Defendants paid the materials cost. The Plaintiff spent KRW 7,012,700 as necessary for each of the above construction works. 4) The Plaintiff received KRW 20 million in total from the Defendants in relation to each of the above construction works.

5) Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 28,372,70,00, including the material cost (i.e., KRW 19,90,000, KRW 1,460,000, KRW 7,012,70) minus the Plaintiff’s paid construction cost of KRW 20,00,000. The Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 8,372,70,00 as the amount less than the above amount claimed by the Plaintiff on the account of an error in the warden. (ii) The Defendants subcontracted the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 1,45,00,00,00 among the construction cost of new housing construction works on the ground of Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si, the Plaintiff subcontracted the construction cost of KRW 8,312,70,00,000 to the Plaintiff.

2) During the construction progress, the Plaintiff and the Defendants asserted that the unit price did not coincide with the Defendants, and subsequently agreed again on the construction cost, and finally determined the construction cost as KRW 20 million, including the material cost. 3) The part asserted by the Plaintiff as to the additional construction is part of the original construction cost.

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment against the Defendants, supra, on August 2013.