1. The counterclaim Defendant: 11,972,651 won to the counterclaim and 15% per annum from August 29, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. The following facts can be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 2, and the whole purport of the arguments as a result of the appraiser Gap's appraisal:

The Lessee (subcontract) set the construction cost of KRW 143,00,000 and the construction period of KRW 143,00,000 from March 23, 2016 to May 31, 2016 from March 23, 2016 to the counter-defendant (subcontractor) of the land located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cheongdam-dong 99-21 (former 448 Building Construction Project, Cheonggu-dong 448), which was contracted by Blus Co., Ltd., for the land located in the Cheonggu-dong 448 Building Construction Project (former 448 Building Construction Project, Cheonggu-dong 448).

B. The counterclaim Defendant completed the instant construction work, received the payment of construction cost from the counterclaim, but the part executed by the counterclaim Defendant was defective, such as the attached Form No. 11,972,651 cost of KRW 11,97,651.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the counterclaim, the part not constructed and the defect in the construction of the instant construction shall be deemed to have failed to perform the obligation under the subcontract with respect to the instant construction. Therefore, the counterclaim Defendant is obliged to pay to the counterclaim damages in proportion to 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from August 29, 2017 to the date of full payment, to the date of delivery of a copy of the construction cost to the non-construction cost and the defect in the instant construction cost.

(B) The counterclaim Defendant asserted that he completed the repair of defects, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge it only by the evidence No. 7, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. 3. conclusion, the counterclaim Defendant’s above assertion is without merit. Thus, it is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the counterclaim Plaintiff’s claim of this case is reasonable.