All appeals are dismissed.

Of the costs of appeal, the costs of appeal between the plaintiff and the fish team construction are individually assessed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that Defendant fish team construction (hereinafter “Defendant fish team construction”) had already paid the Plaintiff the construction cost on the base of the fish team construction (hereinafter “Defendant fish team construction”) based on its stated reasoning.

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by recognizing facts against logical and empirical rules or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 2, based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that it was insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff agreed to compensate for the amount equivalent to the daily input cost in the event that the aforementioned working conditions are not met due to design change, filing of a civil petition, etc., while guaranteeing the Plaintiff the working conditions for 24 hours at the time of the instant construction contract.

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by recognizing facts or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations.

3. As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal Nos. 3 and Defendant fish team construction’s ground of appeal, the lower court determined as follows: (a) based on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,803,50 on behalf of Defendant fish team construction after the instant agreement, thereby incurring damages equivalent to the same amount; and (b) it is insufficient to recognize that the remaining damages incurred.

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, it did not err by recognizing facts in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the calculation of damages,

4. The Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.