1. The Defendant’s KRW 88,490,023 as well as 6% per annum from December 9, 2016 to June 20, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. After receiving a contract from E Farming Association and F, the Defendant subcontracted the Plaintiff the construction work of building site and construction work of building site and construction work of building site and construction work of remodeling of old houses in the aggregate of KRW 125 million for construction work of building site and construction work of remodeling of old houses, around June 2014, the Defendant subcontracted the Plaintiff the construction work of building site and construction work of remodeling of old houses in the aggregate of KRW 125 million.

Since then, the Defendant: (a) demanded the Plaintiff to newly construct the same 2 building units; (b) remove the old house instead of remodelling the old house; and (c) accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to carry out the new construction of the store at KRW 75 million, to carry out the construction of the new construction of the building site at KRW 34 million (=17 million for the new construction of the building site at KRW 19 million x 2), including the construction cost of the building site at KRW 19 million; and (c) remove the old house at the Defendant side.

B. On June 2014, the Defendant separately requested the Plaintiff to accept the restaurant and consortium construction around the end of the end of the year, which removed the old house, and the Plaintiff agreed that the cafeteria and consortium construction cost shall be KRW 160 million in total, respectively, after consultation with the Defendant.

C. From July 2014 to October 2014, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to perform the following additional construction works several times.

1) First, after completion of the construction of a drying house, which is a form of floor, columns, and roof only, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to perform the interior construction work to change the building site to one office among the two drying places, and the Plaintiff determined the construction cost with the Defendant as 24.5 million won and changed the building site to one office. 2) The Defendant, in relation to the sales outlet, has the lighting name of the Plaintiff, not general lighting, and changed the septic tank from 10 to 30. The purification tank is to be installed at the window, and the toilet pipeline constructed on the left side is to the right side.