1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 6,300,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from September 19, 2014 to March 3, 2015.

The following shall be deemed together with the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company that manages multi-family housing, etc., and the defendant is a company that engages in coworking business.

B. On April 6, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with A apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) under which the council of occupants’ representatives determines the defect repair work of the instant apartment as KRW 887,535,000 as the price for the defect repair work of the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C. On April 13, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to enter into the subcontract cycle (hereinafter “instant subcontract”). The Plaintiff entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with a price of KRW 33 million for each of the instant apartment construction works, stipulating that the instant apartment construction works are the front and rear balconys, each of the household units of the instant apartment building, each of the joint stairs and the windows of the said stairs, and the windows of the mechanical studs of the structural studs of the rooftop; hereinafter, the Defendant’s entire string works subcontracted was increased to KRW 38.5 million on November 17, 201).

The Plaintiff paid KRW 32 million to the Defendant, including the instant construction cost, KRW 5 million on June 7, 201, KRW 16.5 million on August 10, 201, and KRW 10 million on January 20, 2012.

E. On December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to deduct KRW 40 million from “the cost of A/S for the repair of the outer wall mold” when settling and finishing the defect repair work between the council of occupants’ representatives of the instant apartment building and the council of occupants’ representatives.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 3 through 4, 5, and Eul's evidence Nos. 7, and the fact-finding to the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case on Nov. 24, 2014, the purport of the whole pleadings as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) at the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff is paid KRW 40 million in total from the council of occupants’ representatives of the apartment complex of this case to the cost of Embombing, Dong-to-dong floor waterproofproof, and the windowing construction cost of the front household outer wall mold.