1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne respectively by each party.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, i.e., the conclusion that the parties included in the allegations added or emphasized in the appellate court, as stated in the following paragraph (2), is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court

2. The addition;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and its judgment 1) asserted that the Plaintiff carried out the additional construction work three times separately from the instant construction work. The Defendant, after directly checking it, acknowledged the amount of additional construction work equivalent to KRW 63.4 million for the first time, KRW 3.4 million for the second time, KRW 32.7 million for the third time, and KRW 39.8 million for the third time, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a total of KRW 135 million for the additional construction work.

B. On April 28, 2014, M of the Defendant’s Asset Management Department M shall recognize only KRW 39,80,000 out of KRW 63,40,000,000,000,000 for the first, second, and third additional construction works claimed by the Plaintiff in relation to the estimate of the second, second, and third additional construction works, as seen earlier, 30,000,000 out of KRW 65,770,00 for the second and third additional construction works, and 5,30,000,000 for the third and third additional construction works, and send the Plaintiff electronic mail.

However, upon the Plaintiff’s request for the payment of the additional construction cost, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to suspend the instant construction work on April 10, 2014, and thereafter ordered the Plaintiff to withdraw and dispose of the instant construction site in Y; ② e-mail sent to the Plaintiff to the effect that, on April 30, 2014, the payment of the construction cost according to the construction cost ratio of the instant construction work was recognized to be KRW 322 million. The Defendant paid KRW 552,420,000 to the Plaintiff up to the time, as e-mails paid the amount of the additional construction cost, thereby recognizing the payment of the additional construction cost by e-mails on April 28, 2014.

(4) On April 23, 2014, the Defendant received a written estimate from K from another construction enterprise, and the remainder of the instant construction project on May 1, 2014.