1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff shall be revoked;

2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the fact-finding on the primary cause of claim Gap's evidence Nos. 3, 9, 12, 13, 17, 20 through 26, 28, and 29 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the fact-finding on the head of the employment center of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, the Plaintiff determined that the construction of reinforced concrete among the "L new construction works" was KRW 1.694 billion (the contract price shall be increased to KRW 2.396 billion) around June 22, 2015; around July 24, 2015, the construction of reinforced concrete was subcontracted with the contract price of KRW 1.18,5 million (hereinafter referred to as "each of the subcontract in this case"); and the Plaintiff may recognize that the construction work completed each of the above construction works amounting to KRW 2.66 million (hereinafter referred to as "each of the above construction works").

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 1,964,228,194 among the above construction cost.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the balance of the construction price of KRW 681,771,806 (=2,646,00,000 - KRW 1,964,228,194) and delay damages therefrom, barring special circumstances.

B. The defendant's assertion is that the subcontract of this case was concluded during the period in which E, the representative director of the Co., Ltd. C (Co., Ltd.) takes over and operates the plaintiff. Thus, in the process of normalization of the plaintiff's construction work in which E actually was in the discontinuance of business, the defendant merely made the appearance of a formal contractual relationship upon request of the defendant for the purpose of raising the plaintiff's construction work performance, and the defendant did not actually subcontract

In addition to the above evidence evidence Nos. 1, 6, 31 and evidence Nos. 1, E acquired the Plaintiff’s management right according to an agreement with D, the representative of the Plaintiff and operated the Plaintiff until August 30, 2016.