1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 128,762,847 and the Plaintiff’s 34,778,861 among them, the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant)’s Counterclaim Defendant’s KRW 22 August 22, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who performs fire-fighting system construction, etc. under the trade name of “B”.

B. On June 21, 2013, the Defendant received a contract from the Korea Water Resources Corporation for the replacement of the C fire-fighting system (hereinafter “instant C”) for KRW 116,495,766 for the construction cost. On November 21, 2013, the Defendant was awarded a contract for KRW 141,400,000 for the “D Construction (Fire-Fighting Sector)” from the Gyeonggi-do Association for the Industries of the North Korean Exchange Services (hereinafter “D”) (hereinafter “instant construction”).

C. On August 22, 2013, the instant C Corporation completed each of the instant D Corporation on June 25, 2014, and the completion amount of the instant C Corporation (i.e., the construction cost settled; hereinafter the same shall apply) was KRW 115,541,286, and the completion amount of the instant D Corporation was KRW 137,068,621.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-4, Gap evidence 5-1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff is the amount calculated by adding value-added tax 10% to the amount obtained by deducting value-added tax, industrial accident insurance premium, employment insurance premium, etc. from the final contract completion amount by 85% as 85% of the completion amount after receiving a subcontract for the instant construction project from the Defendant. The Defendant paid 62,700,000 out of the construction cost, and did not pay the remainder of 34,778,861 won. Furthermore, the Plaintiff is the amount calculated by multiplying 70% of the completion amount by 10% of the value-added tax after deducting value-added tax, industrial accident insurance premium, employment insurance premium, etc. from the final contract completion amount by 70% of the completion amount after receiving a subcontract for the instant construction project from the Defendant. The Plaintiff was unable to receive KRW 93,983,986 even after completion of the construction project, and thus, the Defendant has already determined the construction cost as 55% of the contract price.

On the other hand, the Corporation is affiliated with the D Corporation.