1. Of the part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) who falls under the following amount ordering payment.

Basic Facts

The reasoning for this part of this court is that the "2012" in the third part of the judgment of the first instance is "2013", the "rate of liquidated damages" in the sixth part is "rate of liquidated damages per day of delay", and the "70,000,000 won" in the 9th part is "70,000,000 won", and the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, and this is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Where a contractor cancels a contract after the deadline for completion without completing the construction work within the deadline for completion, with respect to the claim for delay compensation for the claim for the principal claim, the time when the contract was due to the delay compensation shall be the day following the deadline for completion, and the completion period shall be the time when the contractor could have completed the same building by requesting another contractor on the basis of the time when the contractor suspended the construction or due to other reasons for cancellation (not at the time when the contract was rescinded in reality).

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Da14846, Oct. 12, 199). The term of completion under the instant contract is December 2, 2013 and the rate of liquidated damages per day of delay is 1/1,000, and the Defendant’s suspension of construction of the instant case around November 7, 2013 is as seen earlier.

Comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned evidence, the results of the expert appraisal by the first instance trial appraiser C and the purport of the entire pleadings, ① the Plaintiff demanded the resumption of the instant construction by sending postal items to the Defendant over twice on November 18, 2013 and November 25, 2013. On the other hand, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intention to rescind the instant construction contract when failing to comply therewith, and ② the Plaintiff needs approximately 60 days to complete the instant construction through other business entities.

According to the above facts, the period of compensation for delay is December 3, 2013, which is the day after the completion date under the contract of this case, and the completion date thereof is the day after the defendant suspended the construction of this case and is the peremptory notice to the plaintiff for a considerable period of time.