1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 693,950,000.

(b).

1. Basic facts

A. On October 201, the Defendant was awarded a contract for the construction of the building “H” (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Newcom Co., Ltd., Ltd. (the trade name before the alteration was referred to as “Spoking G”), C, D, E, and F (hereinafter “Newcom, etc.”) to the underground second floor, and the ground fifth floor (hereinafter “instant building”) going from G, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, and 17 lots.

(B) The above construction is called “instant construction,” and the above contract entered into between the Defendant and the New Doctrine Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant contract”).

On December 8, 2012, the Plaintiff received a subcontract from the Defendant on the part of the instant construction work, which was based on the construction cost of KRW 409,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) for the construction work from the first to the fifth floor above the ground.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontracted project,” and the said subcontracting contract entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontracting contract”).

The subcontracted project in this case was interrupted by the end of March, 2013.

After that, on September 16, 2013, the Defendant agreed to terminate the instant contract with the Defendant, and entered into a new contract with the I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”) on September 30, 2013 with respect to the remainder of the instant construction.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 5, 11, Gap evidence 4-1, 3, 4-3-1, Eul evidence 3-9, Eul evidence 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On June 30, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to set the construction cost of KRW 738,950,000 up until the discontinuance of the instant subcontract. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 693,950,000, excluding the Plaintiff’s manager who was paid 45,000,000 by the J individual on behalf of the Plaintiff, and delay damages therefrom.

B. The Defendant claiming for the liability of the nominal lender.