1. A notary public belonging to the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office against the Defendant’s Plaintiffs was drafted on January 7, 2014 by the newly established law firm.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Co., Ltd”).

The purpose of the business is to manufacture, process, and sell food, and the Plaintiff B is the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, and the Defendant is the Defendant’s building business. (2) The Plaintiff Company decided to newly construct a food processing plant for rapid freezing in 2013.

On March 29, 2013, the Defendant submitted a written estimate of the construction cost (hereinafter “written estimate”) to the Plaintiff Company for the purpose of obtaining the said processing plant construction work. The date of preparation of the said written estimate is as follows: (a) according to the evidence No. 12, the date of preparation of the said written estimate is as follows: (b) March 26, 2013; (c) the parties asserted that it is March 29, 2013; and (d) accordingly, the said written estimate is followed.

3) On May 2, 2013, the Plaintiff Company is a food processing plant for Daegu-gun D and E block ground (hereinafter “instant plant”) between the Defendant and the Defendant.

) New construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”)

(i) 9.5 billion won (in the absence of a separate indication of value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the construction amount;

(2) As to the construction period from May 2, 2013 to December 1, 2013 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

(C) A written estimate (hereinafter referred to as “written estimate on May 2, 2013”) to add air conditioning equipment to a written estimate (hereinafter referred to as “written estimate”) from March 29, 2013, with the exception of air conditioning equipment, in written estimates from March 29, 2013.

B. (B) The Plaintiff Company requested the Defendant to modify the steel frame, outer wall board, and Captain, among the instant construction works, and accordingly the content of the instant construction works was modified.

On October 31, 2013, the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff enter into a modified contract reflecting the above modified contents. On November 5, 2013, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to confirm the modification of the design and to pay the unpaid construction cost. On December 9, 2013, the Plaintiff’s written estimate reflecting the modified contents as above is “Written estimate on December 9, 2013.”

A. The submission was made.

The defendant on December 31, 2013.