1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s principal lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 493,735,400 and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person engaged in civil and construction works, and the Defendant is a juristic person engaged in tourist hotel business, etc.

B. On April 30, 2017, the Defendant entered into a contract for construction works with the Plaintiff, setting the contract amount of KRW 2,838,000,000 (including value-added tax), May 8, 2017, and October 11, 2017, and 0.05% of the liquidated damages rate, with the Plaintiff.

On October 10, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a modified contract, including the term “the date of completion of the instant construction contract” and the term “the date of completion of the instant contract, including the term “the date of completion of the instant construction contract” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) as of November 30, 2017, and as for other matters, the date of completion shall be the date of approval for use. Compensation for delay shall be calculated from October 11, 2017, the date of completion of the original completion of the construction contract.”

C. On December 7, 2017, the Defendant sent a public letter to the Plaintiff stating that “The completion of the instant construction project was not completed until November 30, 2017, which was the date of completion, and the completion is not known at any time and the enormous damage is reported due to the delay in completion,” and notified the Plaintiff of the purport to terminate the instant contract (hereinafter “instant termination”), December 11, 2017, and December 19, 2017, the Defendant sent a public letter demanding the Plaintiff to settle the accounts following the termination of the contract, and the Plaintiff did not continue the instant construction project from that time.

Around January 2018, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for preservation of evidence with this Court (Seoul District Court Decision 2018Kadan10004), and in the above preservation case, appraiser D (hereinafter “Appraiser”) appraised the construction work of this case and the repair cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, and Eul