1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

The defendants are the defendants.

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 19, testimony and whole purport of pleadings by the first instance court witness E.

On June 8, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract for the construction project with the Defendants on June 8, 2012, under which the Defendants entered into a contract for the construction of the aggregate construction works (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction works”) with the construction cost of KRW 49,528,00,000 and the construction period from June 8, 2012 to September 7, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”).

B. Around June 8, 2012, the Plaintiff commenced the instant construction work, but the same year.

9. 26. The above construction was suspended.

The period and ratio of the above construction performed by the plaintiff until the suspension of the construction of this case is 82.9%.

2) From the conclusion of the instant contract to September 26, 2012, the Defendants paid to the Plaintiff KRW 291,403,800 in total as the construction cost of the instant case (value-added tax separate).

C. The Defendants, upon the completion of the instant construction, directly resumed the instant construction after the lapse of 3 and 4 weeks from the time when the Plaintiff ceased to perform the instant construction, and completed all of the instant construction except for the materials supply work around January 10, 2013.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the cause of a claim is based on the amount calculated by the ratio of the completed construction cost at the time of the discontinuance of the construction work by the contractor on the basis of the total construction cost agreed between the parties, barring any special circumstance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Da42630, Mar. 31, 1992; 94Da31631, 31648, Jan. 23, 1996). 2) In the event that the contract of this case was terminated even, there is no dispute between the parties that the contract of this case is currently rescinded.