1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the above cancellation portion is dismissed.

3.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts of recognition (1) on August 2, 2010, the Plaintiff supplied KRW 73,400,000,000 in total, for the 16th funeral stones for the 16th funeral stones (hereinafter “instant construction”), 24 funeral stones for the 16th funeral stones, and 1,340,000,000 won for the 16th funeral stones for the 16th funeral stones (14,440,000,000), and for the 100 funeral stones (9,000,000,000) for the 1,3,40,000,000,000,000 for the 1,000 funeral stones for the 1,000,000,000 won for the 1,000,000 won for the 1,000,000 won for the 1,000.

(hereinafter hereinafter “instant contract”). (2) The Plaintiff supplied all the stone for a tombstone from August 3, 2010 to September 2010, but recovered one of them again.

The plaintiff suspended part of the building stones installation work.

(3) The Defendant contracted the remainder of the construction work to E, and completed the instant construction work as stone supplied by E to the Defendant by the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap 1 through 5, 7, 8, and 1 evidence of Eul (including a Serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings, without a dispute or a clear challenge

B. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay 54 million won and damages for delay (hereinafter “the claim of this case”) calculated by deducting 9 million won and 10 million won, which the plaintiff was paid to the plaintiff, from the 73.4 million won for the stone supplied by the plaintiff to the plaintiff, and the 10 million won for the 100-year funeral funeral between the recovery of the plaintiff and the 10 million won for the 100-year funeral.

2. The defendant's defense of extinctive prescription is proved to have expired by the statute of limitations.

The contract of this case was to purchase stone necessary for the establishment of a tombstone at the Plaintiff’s expense and supply it to the Defendant by installing and supplying the instant tombstone. After the completion of the construction of this case.