1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 63,649,614 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from November 21, 2017 to February 4, 2020.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

Basic facts, around March 21, 2016, the Defendant concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff on the construction of a housing site and the construction of an access road (hereinafter “instant construction”) on the land in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant land”). Around March 21, 2016, with regard to the construction of a housing site and the construction of an access road (hereinafter “instant construction project”), which is set forth as KRW 245.3 million (including value-added tax) and the period from March 21, 2016 to July 30, 2016.

The Plaintiff commenced the instant construction work on March 21, 2016, and performed the instant construction work by December 20, 2016.

On February 13, 2017, the Defendant drafted a written confirmation to the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on or around December 20, 2016. The Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 170 million by July 30, 2017 (hereinafter “instant written confirmation”).”

Before the document of this case is prepared, the construction cost that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff is KRW 80 million in total.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, and the parties' assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 170,000,000 and the damages for delay due to the confirmation of this case.

The Defendant’s instant confirmation document was drafted on the condition that the Plaintiff complete the remaining work until March 30, 2017.

However, the Plaintiff did not perform all the remaining construction despite the Defendant’s request, and the Defendant completed the remaining construction through D (hereinafter “D”).

Thus, the confirmation of this case was invalidated due to the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of the agreement.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on this is without merit.

Rather, the Plaintiff’s flag is merely KRW 158,488,330 (including value-added tax) and thus, the amount of the construction cost that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff is KRW 78,477,330 (i.e., the Plaintiff’s flag amount of KRW 158,488,330 (including value-added tax).

On the other hand, the Plaintiff.