1. All of the appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) regarding the principal lawsuit and counterclaim and the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of some of the judgment of the first instance as follows. As such, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In the second sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance, "the plaintiff" shall be deemed "the defendant", and "the defendant" shall be deemed "the plaintiff".

(b) In the third or fourth sentence of the first instance judgment, the phrase “the Defendant shall either go through or complete,” and the phrase “the Defendant shall go through or complete,” in the fourth or sixth sentence, followed by the phrase “the same day.”

(c) all the “witnesss” of not more than 8 of the fourth decision of the court of first instance shall be considered as “witnesss of the court of first instance”;

Part 5 of the fifth decision of the first instance shall add to the following:

In full view of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 and 5 of Eul and the testimony of witness E of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff asserted that the final construction cost was KRW 454,458,653, and the Defendant claimed that the construction cost was KRW 393,892,980, on the ground that there was any additional construction work due to a design change, etc. or excluded from the scope of the original construction, etc., and that there was only the fact that the Defendant agreed to the final construction cost was 425,00,000,000, by yielding a half of the construction cost according to the instant first and second settlement agreement.”

E. Of the first and second parts of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the defects described in the No. 5 No. 7 to 12, the part concerning the determination of the defects described in the No. 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “the co-helping division” shall be deemed “the co-helping division” as “the co-helping division”, and some of the 3, 14, and 17 shall be ordered as

[Attachment Table] The Plaintiff’s assertion of the defect defect in Serial Nos. 3 and the construction cost for the repair of defects in this Court’s judgment is not equal to the existing structural frame for the construction of the 3 stairs and thus there is no fault on the part of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s drawings for the new construction of this case are as follows.