1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 71,876,700 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from February 17, 2015 to November 26, 2015.

(a) A counterclaim shall be deemed to be filed together;

1. Basic facts

A. On April 5, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to newly construct hanok on the ground of the site B in the Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, the Defendant-owned.

(hereinafter “instant construction contract”). Of the parts related to this case are as follows:

Article 2 (Amount of Construction Work) Article 3 (Period of Construction Work), Article 3 (Period of Construction Work), 155,000,000 won (Additional Value-Added Tax), shall be extended from April 5, 201 to November 15, 201: Provided, That it is possible to extend the date of construction work due to a natural disaster or any other reason.

Article 4 (Conditions of Prohibition of Substitute Payment) * Contract deposit: 10,000,000 won shall be deposited into the old account of B (Plaintiff) at the same time as the contract is concluded.

* An intermediate payment: A (Defendant) shall be deposited into the Gu unit of B in accordance with the progress of the work as follows:

At the time of arrival of timber: 20,000,000 won for the completion of the wood structure works: 20,000,000 won for the roof of KRW 15,000: The remainder of KRW 15,000 for the subsidies of KRW 40,000 for the loans of KRW 30,000 for the loans of KRW 30,000 for the loans of KRW 20,000 for the additional loans of KRW 20,000 for the loans of KRW 20,00 for the city (Plaintiff) shall be the payment key.

* The due date of construction due to the failure to comply with the above terms and conditions of payment shall be the responsibility of A, and the Guide of B shall be Nonghyup 351-0284-3814-43.

Article 8 (Payment in Arrears) Where the Corporation fails to complete the construction within the period of this construction, it shall calculate the following day and pay a delayed repayment equivalent to 1/1,000 of the down payment every day until completion is made.

B. From April 6, 201 to May 24, 2012, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 54,500,000 in total on seven occasions as the price under the instant construction contract.

C. On the other hand, around September 30, 2012, the Plaintiff appears to have suspended the instant construction work around 2012.

The instant construction was suspended, and thereafter, the Defendant spent construction costs equivalent to KRW 37,203,00 in total while allowing another construction business operator to continue the instant construction, and obtained approval for use from the government offices on June 13, 2013.