1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The appeal cost (including the cost of filing an application for the return of provisional payments) shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is recognized as legitimate in finding facts and determining the judgment of the court of first instance even if the defendant submitted each evidence to this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is to delete the "Development" of the 10th 7th 7th 7th 7th of the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where "the construction of the system on the defendant's computer" is to be "development". Thus, it is to be cited as it

2. The judgment of the first instance court is just and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Although the Defendant filed an application for the return of provisional payment, the application for the return of provisional payment constitutes a preliminary counterclaim that is subject to the revocation or alteration of the judgment on the merits of the case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da25145, Aug. 25, 201). As long as the Defendant maintained the judgment on the merits in this case, it does not separately determine the Defendant’s application for the return of provisional payment on the text of the judgment and the reasons therefor.