1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 23, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract agreement with the Defendant for construction works, each of which is set at KRW 273 million for the building of aggregate and KRW 777 million for soil (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”) among new construction works for urban residential housing units located in Yongsan-si, apartment complex B (hereinafter referred to as “each type of construction work”); and the construction period for each type of construction work is from April 30, 2015 to August 15, 2015 (recognition of the instant construction work); the construction cost is KRW 350 million for each type of construction work (excluding value-added tax); the contract price for each type of construction work is KRW 273 million for the structural construction work; and the construction work is set at KRW 5 million for the instant construction work; and the Defendant paid KRW 50 million for the down payment to the Plaintiff around that time.

B. Around May 2015, the Plaintiff knew the Defendant of the need to change the method of construction due to sticking out the rock while conducting the instant earth gate construction. Around May 2015, C, the Plaintiff’s field manager, the Defendant, the field manager D, and H beaming construction business operator E, etc. agreed to carry out the said construction in a manner of gathering the sn beam beam by a earth and sand method, rather than a method of printing the sn beam by the existing method of construction.

C. The Plaintiff, based on the changed method of construction as seen above, was performing the instant work. On July 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant paid KRW 22,40,000,000 for additional construction due to the remainder of the price for the instant soil removal project and the change in the method of construction, and requested the Defendant to pay the said amount. However, the Defendant rejected this request, and the Plaintiff suspended the instant construction.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 through 6, witness D, witness Eul, witness Eul, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was the completion of the construction of the instant earth boom and the additional construction work that was not included at the time of conclusion of the instant construction contract at the Defendant’s request.