1. Of the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff who is equivalent to the following additional payment order.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 14, 2012, the Defendant concluded a contract for a construction project with ASEAN Co., Ltd. with the construction cost of 390,000,000 (Additional Tax separately) and the construction period from September 18, 2012 to January 15, 2013; and the Defendant paid the amount calculated by multiplying the rate of liquidated damages (1/1,000) for each number of days by the contract price when the construction project is not completed within the construction completion period stipulated in the contract, and the delay under the contract was decided not to apply to the delay due to ASEAN.

(Article 9). (b) of the contract.

On December 21, 2012, the Defendant, A.S., and the Plaintiff agreed to change the time of the instant construction project from A.S. to the Plaintiff.

C. Since then, the instant construction was suspended due to the wintering period and other reasons. The Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a new construction agreement on April 30, 2013 upon ordering the instant construction works other than the instant construction works. According to the said agreement, the Plaintiff would resume the instant construction works within 10 days after the date the said agreement is completed, and the construction regulations correspond to the original contract, and the details of the additional construction works and the construction cost may be adjusted and consulted between the Defendant and the on-site manager and the Plaintiff, and the amount determined according to the result of the said adjustment and consultation was decided as the construction claim, and according to the schedule of the scheduled construction works attached to the said agreement, the Plaintiff would complete the instant construction works up to July 25, 2013.

However, the Plaintiff did not complete the instant construction before July 25, 2013 and suspended the instant construction. On February 3, 2014, the Defendant sent a certificate of content that the instant construction contract concluded with the Plaintiff was terminated as of February 10, 2014 on the grounds that the Plaintiff was neglected to suspend the instant construction work without suspending it, and the said certificate of content is proved.