1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around May 2010, the Plaintiff contracted the construction work from the Defendant with the construction cost of KRW 1.29 billion for the construction work among the construction work for electric source housing complexes (hereinafter “instant construction work”) on the lot of land 18-3 and the lot of land 3, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do.

The Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to pay the construction cost in addition to the Defendant from the lower police officer in 2010. However, the Defendant, among the instant construction works, was at issue at the level C-Class as a result of safety diagnosis on retaining wall construction, and the instant construction was suspended on November 2010 due to the occurrence of dispute between the parties, including requesting the Plaintiff to repair defects.

B. On March 16, 2011, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant construction contract, and filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the construction cost upon demanding the settlement of the payment for completed portion (Scheon District Court Decision 2011Gahap1121), and the Defendant, as a counterclaim, filed a claim for damages for the repair of defects arising from the instant construction work.

(Skcheon District Court 201No. 1664) c.

On November 15, 2012, the Seoul High Court (Chuncheon) 2012Na2304 (Main Office) and 2012Na2311 (Counterclaim) that the Plaintiff appealed after the judgment of the first instance was rendered on November 12, 2014, rendered a judgment that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 31,828,986 to the Defendant and any delay damages incurred therefrom.” The purport of the judgment is that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 134,732,760 to the Defendant, and the Defendant’s claim for damages against the Plaintiff is KRW 16,561,746, the difference is KRW 31,828,986, which is the difference, to the Defendant.”

On the other hand, the Plaintiff appealed again (Supreme Court Decision 2014Da88994, Supreme Court Decision 2014Da8903 (Counterclaim)) and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

(hereinafter the above judgment from the first instance to the Supreme Court is referred to as "the preceding trial of this case"). 【No dispute exists concerning the grounds for recognition, entry of evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff.