1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for cases where the reasoning is stated in this part is as follows. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The second 20 to 21 of the judgment of the first instance is that “the Plaintiff, E, F, G, and H Co., Ltd. constitute a joint supply and demand organization representing the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant joint supply and demand organization,” and all the said companies together referred to as “Plaintiffs”).

B. Three and six pages of the judgment of the court of first instance (attached Form 1) “General Conditions (main terms) of the instant contract” shall be deemed as “attached Form 1.”

C. The third 15-party 15-party 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is the Plaintiff’s “Plaintiff, etc.”.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In a long-term continuing construction project, the overall contract has a binding force different from a contract by the number of vehicles, so whether there is any change in the terms of the contract, such as the construction period, should be determined based on the overall contract. The application for the adjustment of the contract amount is also made before the final completion cost under the overall

The total construction period of the instant contract was extended from December 30, 202 to December 4, 2007 due to a cause not attributable to the Plaintiff, to “from December 30, 2002 to March 31, 2015,” and the Plaintiff applied for the adjustment of the contract amount on June 23, 2014 and March 31, 2015, which is the day before receiving the final completion payment.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the additional indirect construction cost incurred from December 5, 2007 to March 31, 2015, including KRW 7,183,264,962, as well as damages for delay.

B. The first preliminary assertion, even if the total construction period stipulated in the overall contract is not legally binding, the extension of the total construction period is considered as “the content of the contract” and reflects the extension of the said total construction period in the number of vehicles newly concluded during the extended total construction period.