1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit;

1. Basic facts

A. On November 2015, the Defendant entered into a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Plaintiff on a fixed basis as the commencement date of construction work on November 16, 2015, and as the completion date of completion of construction work on February 16, 2016, the construction cost of KRW 242 million (including additional tax) in order to develop the instant forest as a factory site in Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun (hereinafter “instant forest”) with the Plaintiff. The additional construction contract was executed after consultation with the owner of the building. The scope of the instant construction contract was to be from the survey to the completion date of civil works, and entered in one copy and one copy of the general terms and conditions of the contract for private construction work as a document attached thereto.

B. On December 8, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the instant construction contract on the ground that the construction was not completed until the completion date of the instant construction contract was completed, and that the paid construction cost was acquired by deception or useful.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. At the time of entering into the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff asserted that the design drawings and the actual status of the instant forest, which were provided by the Defendant at the time of entering into the instant construction contract, increased the construction period, extended accordingly, and incurred additional construction costs. The Defendant requested the design office to design the construction in line with the current state and requested the Plaintiff to change the construction cost. From November 20, 2015 to November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff received KRW 63 million from the Defendant, even though the cost of additionally investing in the instant construction project was KRW 146,956,48 (146,956, 488, 63 million) and the remainder of the construction cost incurred by the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 83,956,488 (6,488 won -6,63 million) and damages for delay.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on the additional construction works in addition to the instant construction contract, and the Plaintiff is the instant construction works and the additional construction works.