1. Of the part concerning the counterclaim of the first instance judgment, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) who exceeds the following amount ordered to pay.

1. The part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the conclusion among the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the conclusion is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (including the attached Form) in addition to the partial dismissal as set forth in paragraph (2). Thus,

(1) In addition to the Plaintiff’s claim for the completion of extinctive prescription on the additional construction cost claim, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and there is no error as alleged by the Plaintiff as the grounds for appeal). 2. On January 14, 201, the first instance court held that “each of the above claims is around January 14, 2014, which is the date on which the instant construction work and additional construction work is completed,” each of the above claims is deemed to be “on January 24, 2014, ten days after the completion date of the instant construction work.”

In the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff's argument on the basis of each of the above agreements is without merit, and the plaintiff's argument on the basis of each of the above agreements is with no merit (Provided, That the defendant Eul claims for late payment from the day following the completion date of the construction in this case against the unpaid payment, but the 10 million won out of the unpaid payment is within 10 days after the completion date of the construction in this case, and the remaining 120 million won was suspended by an agreement between the parties and thus becomes a debt with no fixed time limit. Thus, the plaintiff's argument on the part exceeding the damages for late payment recognized in the following conclusion is rejected).

On January 14, 2014, which is the offset date of the first instance judgment, the first instance judgment's 22 pages Ha and 1 of the second instance judgment's 22 pages "Around January 24, 2014, which is the offset date of the first instance judgment."

On the face of the judgment of the first instance court 23, the following items shall be added to the 4th sentence, and 5-11 above the 23th sentence shall be deleted.

D. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the statute of limitations defense remains after excluding the above set-off part.