1. Of the part against Defendant RR Co., Ltd. in the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amount exceeds the amount ordered to be paid.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this part of the facts is as follows, except for the cases where part of the facts are rewritten, added, or deleted as follows, and thus, it is identical to the part on “1. Recognition” from 3 to 9.6 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the first instance is also used below the same.

[Supplementary or additional or deleted parts] Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "date of the closing of argument in this case" in Part 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be construed as the "date of the closing of argument in the

Part VII through IV of the judgment of the court of first instance was made by adding "the payment was made in full" to "the final and conclusive share system" (hereinafter referred to as "the instant contract").

Part 7 of the judgment of the first instance court, "A" (hereinafter referred to as "A") shall be added to "AJ (the trade name before and after the change: A and hereinafter referred to as "A")".

Part 8 of the first instance judgment, part 2 of the second part of the upper part of the second part and part 4 "L" shall be deleted.

Under the 8th judgment of the first instance, the second sentence "Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents" shall be applied to "Gu Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (wholly amended by Act No. 14567, Feb. 8, 2017)".

On the 9th page of the first instance judgment, “AB evidence” shall be deleted from the evidence produced in the 4th [based grounds for recognition], and “AH’s testimony” shall be added to “AH’s testimony.”

In the 9th judgment of the first instance court, "the result of this court's verification" in the 6th judgment shall be added to "the result of the on-site inspection of the first instance court".

2. As to the legitimacy of Plaintiff E’s lawsuit, it does not fall under the scope of the trial in the case where Plaintiff E did not separately appeal the dismissed part in the first instance. However, as long as the dismissed part in Plaintiff E’s claim and the rejected part are the same subject matter of the lawsuit in which Plaintiff E sought subcontract consideration.