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.

Facts of recognition

This Court's decision concerning this part is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance except for dismissal or addition as follows, and thus, it shall be accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

7 pages 18 " was found" and found "from June 11, 2009."

The 10th parallel 3th parallel 10th parallel 8th parallel 10th parallel 3th parallel 8th parallel as follows:

【The Minister of National Defense, however, over the 325-day period for delay in the commencement of the construction project on June 4, 2012, the construction investment sector GDP display panel (Deflor, hereinafter “GDP display panel”) announced by the Bank of Korea

(1) Of the increased total amount of private investment expenses calculated using it, the increase in KRW 3.96 billion which reflects 50% of the agreed rate of 3% of the total amount in excess of 3% of the agreed rate of 50%, and calculated the interest rate in construction as KRW 7.825 billion by increasing the increased interest rate of KRW 721 billion for the period of delay of the above start-up period of 325 days, and calculated the interest rate as KRW 3.54 billion, respectively, to increase the total amount of the private investment expenses in KRW 71.354 billion, and approved the increase in the total amount of the private investment expenses, as follows: 10,000 won “6,793,000,000 won” of the 13th 10,000,000 won;

【The average price of 3% of the annual rate of inflation shall be calculated at the ordinary price, and the total amount shall be determined by the ordinary price at the completion date of the relevant industrial complex construction project (as of December 31, 2009), and the “self-sufficiency” of the 11th 1st e.g. shall be determined as the “Fund”.

Judgment

Plaintiff

The main point of the argument is ① The project of this case was delayed 686 days due to the procedure of the prior environmental review, the surface inspection, and the excavation inspection, which is due to the reasons attributable to the defendant.

The defendant has a duty to compensate for the plaintiff's loss due to the price increase in 325 days which recognized the delay due to the reasons attributable to the defendant during the above delay period.

(2) The original defendant has agreed to calculate the amount of losses caused by price increase by applying the GDP display difference.