1. From April 5, 2013 to December 4, 2015, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 11,326,440 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 8, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Defendant for the instant construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) by setting the construction period from June 11, 2012 to July 15, 2012, and the construction cost as KRW 30,000,000 for the construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

B. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 as the construction cost of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although the Plaintiff completed the instant construction project, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant, upon entering into the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff, intended to supply the necessary materials for the instant construction project, but the Defendant did not timely supply them, and the Plaintiff purchased the materials. The price of the materials is KRW 2,527,000.

3) The Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to perform additional construction work other than the instant construction work, and the additional construction cost incurred therefrom is KRW 7,677,00. 4) Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 20,204,000, and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff did not complete the instant construction, which was directly completed by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff cannot be recognized as the Plaintiff’s material procurement or additional construction. Rather, the Plaintiff incurred damage, such as the Plaintiff’s failure to complete the instant construction and the Plaintiff caused the death of pigs, etc., while performing the instant construction. Considering such circumstances, the construction cost payable to the Plaintiff is no longer the

C. According to the overall purport of the entry and pleadings as to whether the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on August 4, 2012, according to the following: (i) the Plaintiff’s completion of the construction work around August 4, 2012.