1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff and the plaintiff corresponding to the revoked part shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of “(the Plaintiff and the intervenor agreed on April 26, 2012, the obligation to pay the subcontract construction cost of this case, which was not paid to the intervenor, at KRW 125 million)” at the end of the 6th judgment of the court of first instance, No. 6, 18.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that, based on the instant prime contract (Article 16(1) of the General Conditions for Construction Contract) x 33.16% of construction cost [the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff construction cost of KRW 915,30,257,390 [the total construction cost of KRW 2,460,257,390 (the total construction cost of KRW 2.45,000 + the additional construction cost of KRW 310,257,390) 】 33.16% of construction cost [the construction cost of KRW 927,158,396, KRW 396, KRW 396, KRW 168, KRW 398, KRW 1686, KRW 1686, KRW 16865, KRW 168686, KRW 16865, KRW 1686, KRW 16865] of construction cost already paid to the Plaintiff.

B. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 7, and 9-1, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 12, and 17. A) The defendant would receive financial support from the State and the Seoul Metropolitan Government for the improvement of the facilities of the Cheongdong Infant Care Center, and construction of the Cheongdong Infant Care Center as an electronic bid using the National Electronic Procurement System of the Public Procurement Service.