1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 1,620,00,000 to the Plaintiff limited liability company A; and (b) KRW 1,580,00,000 to the Plaintiff B; and (c) each of them on July 2013.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 5 and the entire purport of the pleadings as a result of the request for appraisal to appraiser D by this court:

1) Plaintiff A Limited Liability Company (former trade name: Limited Liability Company E, hereinafter “Plaintiff A”).

(C) On June 1, 2010, between the Defendant and the Defendant, the construction of an officetel of the size of 10 stories underground and 10 stories above ground on the site of Daejeon Seosung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant construction”).

(2) The contract amount is KRW 5,902,050,000 (including value-added tax) with respect to the contract amount, and the contract period is extended from June 201 to January 201 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) On June 2010, pursuant to the instant contract, Plaintiff A commenced the instant construction and discontinued the construction. The progress rate of the instant construction is 91.77%.

3) Meanwhile, on October 29, 2012, Plaintiff A transferred to Plaintiff B the claim of KRW 1,580,000,000 among the claim for the construction cost against the Defendant. On the same day, Plaintiff A notified the assignment of the claim on the same day and delivered to the Defendant at that date. (b) On the same day, in the event that the construction contract is rescinded without the completion of the construction work and the construction cost is to be settled based on the nature and the non-construction cost, the construction cost shall be calculated by applying the agreement to the construction cost by applying the ratio of the base amount and the construction cost calculated based on the construction cost actually paid or to be disbursed on the non-construction portion.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da40995, Feb. 26, 2003). However, according to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s suspension without completion of the instant construction and the progress rate up to the date is 91.77%. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff A the construction cost of KRW 5,416,311,285 (=5,902,050 x 0.9177).

However, as seen earlier, Plaintiff A.