1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the remainder, excluding the part concerning the counterclaim of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff C), is as follows.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 7, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into each of the instant contracts. On the ground of the Defendant Company and the Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E, the size of the 1st underground floor and the 6th ground level (F; hereinafter “instant building”).

(2) As to the contract amount for construction works, construction works, installation works, electrical construction works, etc. among the new construction works, the contract amount of one billion won (excluding value-added tax) and the contract amount for construction works, which are each set out during the construction period from July 21, 2014 to March 21, 2015 (hereinafter “instant one contract”).

(2) On July 7, 2014, Defendant C and the Plaintiff concluded a contract for construction works (hereinafter referred to as “instant two contract”) with respect to interior works, waterproof works, design works, and other works among the new construction works of the instant building (hereinafter referred to as “instant building contract”) with Defendant C and the instant building, with the terms and conditions that each contract is made from July 21, 2014 to March 21, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant two contract”).

3) On March 18, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an amendment agreement with the Defendant Company to extend the construction period of the instant one contract to April 30, 2015 on the ground of the lack of absolute air due to rain. B. The completion of the construction of the instant building and the Plaintiff, on April 10, 2015, obtained approval for the use of the instant building from the head of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City for the instant building. The Defendants completed the construction under each of the instant contract and delivered the instant building to the Plaintiff after completing the construction under each of the instant contract. C. The Plaintiff’s settlement agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C on April 15, 2015, which was approved for the use of the instant building (hereinafter referred to as “value-added tax”) with Defendant C and “the construction cost under the instant two contract shall be settled separately.”