1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B among the part regarding the main lawsuit is revoked, and the above part is revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Company is a corporation that carries out civil engineering, building, soil construction, and reinforced concrete construction business, and the Defendant C is the former representative director of the Defendant Company (signing on February 19, 2013).

From April 2006 to June 2010, the Plaintiff retired from office as a management director of the Defendant Company. From April 2006 to February 2009, the Defendant Company received contracts from April 2006 to February 2009, and did not receive a separate benefit from the Defendant Company.

B. After March 2009, Defendant C received orders or the Plaintiff received orders from Defendant C in the name of the Defendant Company, Defendant C and the Plaintiff settled profits between the Plaintiff regardless of who received orders from Defendant C and the Plaintiff.

C. Around March 2009, Defendant Company entrusted the construction of a factory site to Ulsan-gun D and E (hereinafter “instant construction”). The starting part was Defendant C, and the starting part was ordered by the Plaintiff, respectively.

Meanwhile, according to the Plaintiff’s wife F’s statement of “G A No. 4 (Final Tax Return Report)” in his wife F, G appears to be a regular trade name; however, the Plaintiff’s complaint, the Plaintiff’s preparatory brief dated June 11, 2014, etc. used the name “I” in the name of “I,” and both appear to be the same company, and “G” is deemed to be the same company; hereinafter “G.”), while operating a equipment rental business, one of the above G was provided for the construction work of the instant construction site from March 2009 to June 20 of the same year.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole testimony and pleading of the witness of the first instance court H

2. Determination on the counterclaim claim by the defendant company

A. The amount that the Defendant Company asserted by the parties concerned paid to the Plaintiff for the purpose of the construction cost and cost of the instant case is KRW 628,06,010,000, and the Plaintiff’s expenses relating to the instant construction work out of the said money.