All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court settled the additional charges by the instant agreement.

Although there is no agreement on the settlement of reduction for the final contract price or for the final contract price, the Defendant is obligated to pay additional lectures and losses, etc., which are recognized to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenors, in accordance with the interest rate determined and publicly notified by the Fair Trade Commission pursuant to Article 13(8) of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract Act”), and the initial date is the date following the expiration of the warranty liability

Examining the records in accordance with the relevant legal principles, the above judgment of the court below is justifiable.

In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there is no error by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the interpretation of a disposal document or the scope of application of the Subcontract Act and the Framework Act on Small and Medium Enterprises, the scope of subcontract consideration under the Subcontract Act, the scope of application of the notified interest rate under the Subcontract Act

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.