1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part concerning the claim for the agreed amount by the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff is modified as follows.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is that “the plaintiff is obligated to pay to the defendant the amount of KRW 493,300,000,000 as part of the above contract amount, which the defendant claims, as part of the above contract amount,” and the sum of the sum of the sum of the sum of the sum of KRW 480,000,000 and KRW 13,300,000,000 out of the sum of the sum of the sum of the sum of KRW 48,30,000 as follows.

"In doing so, the defendant's defenses and selective preliminary counterclaims against the main lawsuit added by the trial court are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for those determined as stipulated in Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the defendant's defenses and selective preliminary counterclaims added in the trial of the political party

A. As to the right of retention defense based on the right of recourse for additional beneficial costs, the Defendant asserted that the right of retention defense was based on the following: (a) the Defendant: (b) the Defendant, while moving into the sixth floor of the instant building; and (c) the dwelling room, the new house, the attached house (two houses), and the Vietnamaro (2 houses) the amount of KRW 5.7 million was increased; and (d) there is an increase in the value of the building equivalent to the above amount; (b) the Defendant has a right to demand a reimbursement of KRW 5.7 million and to attract the 6th floor of the instant building; and (b) the Defendant bears the above construction cost on the basis of the images written in

Since it is insufficient to recognize that the above construction has increased the objective value of the building of this case, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

B. As to the claim for selective necessary reimbursement and the claim for the return of unjust enrichment, the Plaintiff asserted by the Defendant 1 is obligated to reimburse the Defendant the amount equivalent to wages for the management of the instant building from April 13, 2006 to August 30, 2015, as necessary expenses. If the Plaintiff and the Defendant are to file a lawsuit seeking the construction of the instant building, the management during the said period, and the claim for the construction cost, filed by subcontractor D, as to the appeal filed by the subcontractor, the Plaintiff and the Defendant.