1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 6,277,123 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from September 17, 2015 to June 30, 2016.

1. The following facts in common with the principal lawsuit and counterclaim can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 1, 2, 5, 1, 5, 3, 1, and 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the appraisal of defects and defects by the appraiser C.

The plaintiff is a person who changes the structure in the name of "D", and the defendant is a person who owns the Felel in Incheon-gun E with G and 1/2 shares.

B. On December 5, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the structural change of the living accommodation facility structure (i) the construction cost for the Plaintiff’s structural change between the Defendant and the her neighborhood living facility and the living accommodation facility (hereinafter “instant construction”). From December 15, 2014 to January 30, 2015, the construction period of which was determined as KRW 145,00,000, and the construction period of which was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction”).

(2) The Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff on the day of the contract, and the remainder was paid in accordance with the progress of the construction project.

C. On December 2014, 2014, the Plaintiff commenced the instant construction work and received a total of KRW 80 million from the Defendant from March 26, 2015. (2) However, around March 26, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of KRW 106,576,870, alleging that the construction completion rate against the Defendant was 90%, and that the additional construction cost was 56,000 won, and that the additional construction cost was 56,00,000 won. Since the Defendant refused it, the Plaintiff suspended the remainder of the construction work from that time, set aside the entrance of the said telecom, and exercised the right of retention.

3) Even after that, there is a conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the determination of the amount of progress payment and the amount of additional construction works, and the Plaintiff delivered the construction site to the Defendant through appraiser C in the process of appraisal of the existence and defects in the construction site on November 23, 2015.

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s claim for construction cost 1) whether to increase or decrease the construction cost and the scope thereof is the beginning.