1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) by aggregating the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as stated in Paragraph (2) below; and (b) the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding “additional judgment” as stated in Paragraph (3) below, and therefore, it is acceptable as it is

2. Parts of modification; and

A. Under the second sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance, the term “C road” in the 8th sentence is regarded as “F-only road.”

B. The fourth and fourth written judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “Defendant 30, Jun. 30, 2014”) shall be deemed “ June 30, 2016.”

C. The first instance judgment’s 8th to 9th 6th eth eth eth eths are as follows.

- the following-

3. Part of the claim for counterclaim; and

A. The Defendant’s assertion agreed to assign a joint performance engineer in relation to the instant construction project, but failed to comply with the agreement. The progress of the instant construction project was delayed due to the Plaintiff’s obligee’s provisional attachment of the claim for construction price and the Plaintiff’s delinquency in payment of the fourth premium.

As a result, the Defendant spent the expenses equivalent to KRW 254,618,318 in total by additionally inserting human resources and equipment to place a joint performance engineer on behalf of the joint performance engineer or to meet the delay of construction (=the expenses equivalent to KRW 86,429,730 in addition to the expenses for additional human resources and equipment of KRW 168,18,58 in total).

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the remainder of KRW 196,408,789 (=254,000,000 - 57,591,211) obtained by deducting KRW 57,591,211 from the damages equivalent to KRW 254,00,000 paid by the Defendant pursuant to the first payment note.

B. In the event that the parties to the legal principle of judgment 1 form a joint supply and demand organization and receives construction works from the contractor, in principle, the joint supply and demand organization constitutes a partnership under the Civil Act, and the principle of freedom of contract is applied to the partnership agreement. Therefore, the members may determine the terms of