1. The Defendant’s KRW 933,312,050 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from September 26, 2013 to September 26, 2014.

A. The circumstances leading to the dispute of this case

A. On October 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the Defendant with respect to part of the interior works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among the KRPATRC PosJECT to be constructed at the Round of the Defendant and Saudi Arabia (hereinafter “instant construction works”) on the following terms:

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”). 1. The name of the original contract owner: KRPSAR PoECT

2. The name of the subcontracted project: KTPSARC PRJEC;

3. The place of construction: Saudi Arabia;

4. Period from October 4, 201 to May 30, 2012;

5. Contract amount: 1,904,100,000 won: Value of supply in 1,731,00,000 won* Value-added tax on labor cost under Article 84 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry: 173,100,000 won.

6. Payment of the price;

(a) Advance payment: (a) Within 10 percent of the value of supply (10%) after entering into a contract; (b) in principle, payment shall be made after receipt of performance securities and performance securities within 15 days from the date of receipt by the ordering person or from the date of contract;

(b) Method of payment: (1) Payment made as of the date of conclusion of a contract: ① Payment made as of the end of the following month; and

C. Paragraph (1) of the Contract Specialist Clause (1) that does not change the unit price for the same item at the time of additional contracts and settlement other than this contract. (2) All the expenses incurred in the occurrence of an on-site adaptation worker at the time of the Plaintiff’s occurrence of an on-site adaptation worker at the cost of this contract are borne by the Plaintiff. The Defendant may request the Plaintiff to make an additional work at the time of the Plaintiff’s daily extension work, and the Plaintiff shall comply with the request; and 12. After the settlement of the substitute (the Defendant and the ordering party) is completed.

B. On September 16, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to increase the construction cost of the instant contract to KRW 6,621,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) and drafted a detailed statement (Evidence A2) stating the details of the modification.

(hereinafter referred to as “the first amendment contract of this case”). The above specifications are the settlement terms.