1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the instant case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for modification and addition as follows. Thus, this is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

The fourth 2 pages of the judgment of the first instance is as follows: “The design service contract for the instant construction project entered into with the Plaintiff” shall be amended as “the part concerning the support of human resources in the field of electrical measurement and control, which was subcontracted from the Dongmm-Tech Corporation, the Seoul High Technology Corporation, which takes charge of the design field among the enterprises that form a consortium with the Plaintiff regarding

5,099,042,517 won (i.e., KRW 4,635,493,197 value-added tax of KRW 463,549,320) for the 14th five pages of the first instance judgment, shall be amended “5,099,042,510 won (including value-added tax)” and “5,099,042,517 won” for the 7th 13th 14th e.g. “5,099,042,510 won” shall be amended.

At the beginning of the 8th 12th 12th am the text of the judgment of the first instance, “The instant construction contract is a fixed contract for which the contract amount has been determined, so even if the actual construction cost was more than the agreed contract amount, the Plaintiff may not claim the Defendant for the increase thereof.”

The 8th sentence of the first instance judgment shall be added to the following 18th sentence, and the 19th sentence “A” shall be amended to “B,” and the 10th sentence “(11)” shall be amended to “C,” respectively:

Article 20 through Article 23 of the General Conditions of the Construction Contract in the instant case permits the adjustment of the contract amount in cases falling under the grounds for each provision. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion regarding this part of the contract amount is unacceptable, insofar as the Plaintiff claims the adjustment of the contract amount by asserting that it falls under the grounds for the adjustment of the contract amount under the general conditions of the construction contract in the instant case.

A person shall be appointed.

2. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.