The part of the judgment of the first instance against the principal lawsuit exceeds the amount ordered to be paid below.

(a) A counterclaim shall be deemed to be filed together;

The reasoning for this part of this Court is as stated in Paragraph (1) of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition or dismissal of a part as follows:

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). The following shall be added to the fifth statement of the judgment of the first instance.

“** The Defendant’s business division: the shipment management of products, water supply, business, operation of spons / Spons / Civil Petitions / The Plaintiff’s business affairs for processing civil petitions / The Plaintiff’s business affairs: Craraasaw 4840 types of installation and civil engineering works / blasting (spack, drying, powder, powder) and / other aggregate production (spack 25m, sand 6m or less - prefabricated 3.0m or less) / pipes, groundwater development, aggregate upper / spacks of sponss, and spacks: Fifth below the fifth sentence of the first instance judgment of “the date of September 29, 2017”.

From the sixth half of the judgment of the court of first instance to the third half, the following shall be applied:

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(i) entry of evidence Nos. 8, 9, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The court’s judgment on the cause of the claim is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance No. 2-A.

as described in paragraph (1).

(main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act).

(1) According to the instant trade agreement, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the aforementioned expenses on behalf of the Plaintiff, while paying the Plaintiff KRW 171,569,080 for basic construction costs for the installation of aggregate extraction machines and KRW 27,05,738 for powders used by the Plaintiff on August 8, 2017 and November 2017. Therefore, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the said expenses on behalf of the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 198,624,818 for basic construction costs for the installation of aggregate extraction machines (i.e., KRW 171,569,080 for additional construction costs for the installation of aggregate extraction machines) (i.e., KRW 171,569,05,738 for additional construction costs of KRW 27,05,738 for additional construction