The plaintiff's appeal and the claims extended by this court are all dismissed.

The costs of appeal and the claims in this court.

1. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if each evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is written or added as follows.

2. On January 15, 2018, “B” as of January 15, 2018, the service period of the first instance judgment 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2

3) On May 3, 2018, the end of the 2018. Around June 25, 2018, “B” added the following as follows. 6 pages 4,276,650: “(g) the Plaintiff submitted to D agency the surety insurance policy for KRW 4,276,650 on the instant contract deposit; D agency received KRW 4,276,650 from G company on the ground of the Plaintiff’s non-performance of the contract; and the Plaintiff paid the said money to G company on January 3, 2019 [based on recognition] [Attachment 62,67] on the 4th 7th 4th 4th 4th 12th 4th 5th 5th 5th 5th 10, “the Plaintiff’s 10th 6th 6th 7th 7th 2018 or 6th 7th 2018.

'The portion' is as follows:

1. On the ground that the termination of the instant contract by D Bodies is null and void, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained by deducting KRW 11,128,220 from the total service cost of the instant contract at KRW 28,51,00; (b) 17,382,780; and (c) 7,260 from the 3rd building design drawings of the instant contract.