1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,597,980 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from July 25, 2015 to March 14, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”) with the Defendant to accept a subcontract for construction cost of KRW 44,00,000 (including value-added tax) among the construction works for freezing and freezing storage facilities on the D ground (hereinafter “the entire construction works of this case”) that the Defendant contracted from C (hereinafter “C”) on the grounds that the Defendant would install 2,067 square meters in freezing and freezing rooms among the construction works for freezing and freezing storage facilities (hereinafter “the entire construction works of this case”), and entered the construction contract in Article 1 of the instant construction contract as “the terms of the instant construction contract” (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”).

B. The Plaintiff received KRW 5,00,000 from the Defendant on the day of the instant construction contract.

C. The Plaintiff suspended the instant construction work under the instant construction contract, and around that time, the Defendant also suspended the entire construction work.

On August 8, 2013, C notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant entire construction contract on the grounds of the Defendant’s discontinuance of construction works.

On July 4, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against E and F, which is a joint and several surety for the construction cost of C and C, with this Court 2013Gahap100043, and rendered a judgment on July 4, 2014 that “E has become final and conclusive as a substitute decision for conciliation as of January 6, 2014 by this Court, and thus lost its status as the Defendant in the instant case upon termination of the lawsuit, and jointly with the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant in this case), that “E would pay KRW 277,503,00 and delay damages therefor,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 25, 2014.

E. The height ratio of the entire construction of this case calculated in consideration of defects and non-construction parts of the part completed by the Defendant at the time of termination of the entire construction contract of this case is 74.39%, and the height ratio of the entire construction of this case is 61.9%, 92.33%, 92.33%, and the height ratio of equipment installation works is 82.82.