1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Paragraph (1) is applicable to the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The summary of the case asserts that the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to settle the construction cost according to the actual volume of construction as indicated in the work log with respect to the subcontracted soil and structure construction work, and that the Plaintiff seeks payment of the construction cost as to the part which was executed until the discontinuance of construction work, other than the amount of KRW 684,986,542, excluding the amount of KRW 100,780,215, seized and collected by the Plaintiff’s obligee E, and the delay damages therefrom.

The judgment of the court of first instance accepted some of the plaintiff's claims (477,692,223 won and damages for delay) and dismissed the remaining claims, and the defendant appealed against the part against which he lost.

2. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the modification as stated in the following Paragraph (3), and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article

3. 이 법원에서 변경하는 부분 제1심판결 중, ◆ 제3쪽 제17행의 “270,000,000”을 “27,000,000”으로, 제3쪽 제14행, 제22쪽 제5, 6행의 각 “957,704,817원”을 “957,704,818원”으로, 제22쪽 제6행, 제27쪽 제1, 6행의 각 “479,116,436원”을 “479,116,435원”으로, 제27쪽 제5, 9행의 각 “477,692,223원”을 “477,692,222원”으로 각 고쳐 쓴다.

◆ 제6쪽 제1행의 “갑 제1호증”을 “을 제2호증”으로 고쳐 쓴다.

◆ 제7쪽 마지막행의 “요청한 사실 등이” 부분을 “요청한 사실, ⑥ 그 후 원고는 2009. 10.경 기성 공사대금의 미지급을 이유로 작업을 중단하기 전까지 현장의 토공사 물량을 이의 없이 처리하였고, 개비온 옹벽공사 등의 업무지시도 수행한 사실 등이”로 고쳐 쓴다.

◆ 제9쪽 제5행 내지 제10쪽 제18행 부분(제1심판결 이유 중 제3의 가.2)항...