1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) constituted KRW 11,822,149 and the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On February 18, 2011, the Defendant: (a) the head of Madosan-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and 187 square meters in K (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) owned by the Defendant; (b) the head of Mado-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do;

3) As to the ground building (hereinafter “instant building”)

(2) On June 9, 2011, the Defendant filed an application for a construction permit with respect to a new construction, and obtained a construction permit, which is a multi-class neighborhood living facility (general restaurant), 1st floor, and general steel structure, for the main purpose. According to the design drawings attached to the said construction permit, the outer wall of the instant building was cut off in durb. durb. The Defendant filed an application for a change to the said construction permit with the head of Ntsan Gun on the 20th of the same month, and filed an application for a change to the building area on the 243.74 square meters, total floor area 4.8 square meters, 454.8 square meters, second class neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants, offices), second class neighborhood living facilities for main purpose, second class reinforced reinforced concrete structure, second class neighborhood living facilities for main purpose, and second class neighborhood structure for main purpose. According to the design drawings attached to the said construction permit (hereinafter “the changed drawings of June 20, 2011”), each floor of the instant building was accumulated 1.

B. 1) Won, the Defendant’s construction of the instant building orally around May 201 (hereinafter “instant construction”) following the conclusion of the instant contract.

2) As to the contract agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”).

(2) Around October 31, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the construction of the instant building, which is not the first building permit, but the second floor building following the oral contract. Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) prepared a modified design drawing through an urban construction design office; and (b) filed an application for change of the construction permit with the head of Nansan Gun on June 9, 201; (c) KRW 220 million on August 30, 2011; and (d) drafted a notarized agreement on the purport that “the construction cost of the instant contract shall be KRW 220 million. The Plaintiff completed the instant building by October 31, 201.”

3 won, the defendant on December 26, 201.