1. The judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, according to the amendment of the purport of the claim and the defense of set-off by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) at the trial.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The judgment of the court of first instance cited only the part of the claim for the unpaid construction cost of KRW 29.22,00,000 among the counterclaim claims filed by Defendant B, and dismissed the claim for damages of KRW 60,000,000 and damages for delay due to the obstruction of removal. Since Defendant B did not file an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the claim for damages of KRW 60,000 and damages for delay due to the obstruction of removal was excluded from the subject of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be found in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and 22 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the results of the appraisal by the first instance appraiser H, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

In Daegu Dong-gu, the Plaintiff is running a lodging business with the “EMel” in the “EMel” (hereinafter “EMel”), and the Defendants, as married couple, are carrying on a painting business with the trade name.

B. On April 1, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendants under the name of Defendant B (hereinafter “instant construction contract”), whereby the Plaintiff contracted the Defendants with the outer wall design construction work of the instant telecom (hereinafter “instant painting construction work”) at KRW 78 million, and the construction period is from April 15, 201 to May 15, 201, with the penalty for delay at an amount equivalent to 3/1000 of the construction cost per day of delay per day (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendants for the construction of an amount equivalent to 3/100 of the construction price per day of delay (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendants the construction price of the instant telecomcing and painting construction work of KRW 13 million and KRW 13 million per day of the instant telecomcing construction work (hereinafter “the instant secondary construction work”). From 201, the construction period is 3.