1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The construction supply and demand of Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd. and the shop design 1) Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Uulra Construction”).

A) On September 10, 2012, a consortium was organized with the mobilization system company, Samsung C&T company, etc., and was selected as a contractor for D-Newly constructed construction ordered by the National Armed Forces Finance Management Body. At the time, the tender was a package contract offer for the companies that submitted the optimal design proposal that accepted the requirements required by the Ministry of National Defense as the minimum price. The tender was a package contract offer for the companies that submitted the optimal design proposal that accepted the requirements required by the Ministry of National Defense, and the T-Skey Construction among the details of the said new construction works (hereinafter “instant

The construction cost set to the Plaintiff was KRW 3,116,121,315. (2) On the other hand, the Ulsan Construction started working plans after consultation with F, who is the unit to use the facility (hereinafter “user unit”). During the consultation process, the employer unit required the installation of the U.S. network equipment and the volume of sound image (AV) equipment to increase the number of equipment for the sound (AV) equipment to link the construction with the U.S. military. military.

Accordingly, the Ulsan Construction demanded the increase in the construction cost by securing the budget later in the ordering office, and prepared a shop design drawing that reflects the above requirements around January 15, 2013.

B. On the basis of the content reflected in the shop design drawings on July 26, 2013, Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd. (1) as to the instant construction project, based on the subcontract agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant, each of the following subcontract agreements (hereinafter “instant subcontract agreements”) between July 26, 2013 and March 22, 2014, with respect to the instant construction project, the construction cost of the instant construction project is KRW 4,873,00,000 (including value-added tax), and the period thereof.

(2) On August 1, 2013, the Defendant concluded a contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff to pay an amount equivalent to 95% of the construction cost stipulated in the instant subcontract to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to perform the instant construction (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

The key point of the instant agreement is the agreement.