1. On June 14, 2017, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) KRW 111,098,936 and paid to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) for KRW 98,778,936.

On April 22, 2014, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract for each construction project between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the defendant entered into a contract for construction works on the manufacturing and installation of a fire tank.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant fire-fighting tank construction contract”). 1. Construction name: Iron and team construction works

3. Period of construction: November 30, 2014 as of May 27, 2014.

4. Contract amount: 300,300,000 won (including value-added tax);

6. Completion portion: A contract for construction work entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on May 27, 2014, which entered into on the following terms, after the end of each month:

(hereinafter “The instant steel frame and the sales panel construction contract.” On December 26, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a subcontract for the construction work for the manufacture and installation of the storage gate (including value-added tax; hereinafter “instant storage gate”) with the construction amount of KRW 77,00,000 (including the value-added tax) with the construction amount of KRW 77,00.

(1) On May 6, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a detailed statement of design change, which included the estimated cost of the instant fire extinguishing and the instant steel frame and the instant construction works, as KRW 226,70,00 (excluding value-added tax), and on May 21, 2015, the instant steel frame and the printing team construction and the instant storage strawer were completed, but the instant fire extinguishing construction were completed.

2. A frequent work instruction by the Defendant’s representative led to change of the design at any time, and the construction cost has increased.

Since calculating the cost of construction work and submitting a detailed statement on the design modification case, it is desirable to review the content of the design modification and pay the cost of construction work to the defendant, but the plaintiff's own failure to perform the work, so it is desirable to settle the cost of construction work. 6.