1. The Defendant’s KRW 685,380,880 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 29, 2013 to July 19, 2013, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 15, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the extension of C Hospital funeral hall (hereinafter “instant construction”) on the land outside B and nine parcels southnam-gun, Namnam-gun, and the main contents are as follows.

Construction period: Contract price of 1.825 billion won from November 19, 2010 to July 19, 201: Contract price of 1.825 billion won (including value-added tax): 100,000 won: 30% of the contract price after the concrete building of the underground floor columns, 30% of the contract price after the installation of the concrete building of the second floor columns, 30% of the contract price after the completion inspection, 30% of the contract price after the completion inspection, and other matters: there shall be no increase or decrease in the construction cost between two companies due to a modification of a design during the construction.

B. On June 201, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to extend the completion date to September 19, 201 for the reason of the suspension of construction, etc. (from December 15, 2010 to March 1, 201) among the instant construction projects, and approved it.

C. On September 3, 2011, the Plaintiff: (a) submitted a report on approval for use and an inspection to Nonparty D's office, a certified architect, to Nonparty D's office; and (b) received a written approval for use from the head of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries on September 20, 201; and (c) issued a warranty bond for the instant construction from Nonparty D's Construction Mutual Aid Association on September 21, 201, and issued it to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 7 (including each number in the case of additional evidence) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the construction cost of this case, which was not paid by the Defendant, is KRW 247,500,000, and that the Plaintiff was a new and additional construction work upon the Defendant’s request for modification of design through multiple times. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said construction cost and additional construction cost totaling KRW 685,380,880, and damages for delay.

B. As to the gist of the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant raised objection.