1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 44,960,00 and its KRW 39,960,00 among them, the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 44,960,000 on January 26, 2010.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. In around 2009, the Plaintiff is the owner who awarded a contract for the new construction of Gyeonggi-gun C ground (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Korea International Engineering Certified architect Office, Inc., and the Defendant is the subcontractor who subcontracted the construction of the instant building (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Korea International Engineering Certified architect Office on July 8, 2009 with the following content:

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). The construction price: KRW 360,00,000 (value added tax on KRW 30,000,000 among the above construction price shall be borne by the Defendant, while value added tax on the remainder shall be borne by the Plaintiff respectively): the construction period from July 8, 2009 to September 10, 2009: 3/100 special conditions: the contractor shall be liable for defects within three years after the defect warranty certificate.

B. From July 14, 2009 to January 16, 2010, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant totaling KRW 256,000,000 among the construction cost stipulated in the instant subcontract agreement.

C. On January 25, 2010, the Defendant discontinued the instant construction work, and on the same day, left the construction site at the instant construction site.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 17, Eul evidence 1 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff filed a claim for return of unjust enrichment for the non-construction portion. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the sum of KRW 256,00,00,000 among the construction cost stipulated in the instant subcontract, but the construction cost for the non-construction portion reaches KRW 180,403,492. The Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 109,638,903 [256,00,00 for the previous construction cost - (256,000 for the changed construction cost - total construction cost according to the changed construction cost - KRW 326,764,589 for the changed construction cost 180,403,492 for the non-construction cost). 2] The Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment for the disposal of waste under the pretext of waste treatment and miscellaneous treatment.