The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

All costs of appeal including costs incurred by supplementary participation are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court citing this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case, except for partial revision or addition as follows.

Part 3(A) of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended from the first line to the preceding part of the third line “third minute”, and the 11th basis for recognition shall be amended by “B Nos. 9, 10, 11” with “B No. 9, 12”.

“Plaintiffs” shall be the Intervenor joining the Defendant on October 12, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “Supplementary Intervenor”).

As between the prime contract works of this case, earth and water supply and drainage works of this case (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontracted works”).

As to the contract amount of KRW 11,10,00,00 (including value-added tax) and the period of construction from October 12, 2010 to February 14, 2012, a subcontract is concluded with respect to the contract amount of KRW 11,10,00 (including value-added tax), and the subcontract is amended on November 22, 2010 to KRW 15, the 12th of the judgment of the first instance to the 8th of 2010.

Since the Plaintiff incurred damages of KRW 3,861,737,148 due to the termination of the remainder contract of this case due to the nonperformance by the Intervenor, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 886,581,300 to the Plaintiff the contract deposit within the scope of the Plaintiff’s damages. The following is added to the first instance judgment of KRW 16,18,30.

Although the Plaintiff asserts that the contract may be terminated only by the fact of delayed payment of wages under the letter of waiver of construction (Evidence A, No. 37, 38, 43, 45) prepared by the Intervenor, it is difficult to view that the contract can be terminated immediately solely by the fact of delayed payment of wages in light of the content of the letter of waiver of construction, etc.

[] The 18th 17th 17th son of the judgment of the first instance, “B No. 8” was amended to “A No. 14, 15, and B No. 8 and 9,” and the 19th 2nd son’s “h 19th h h h h h h h h.”