1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. On July 31, 2012, the Defendant concluded a contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff that “The Defendant shall conclude a contract with the Plaintiff for the construction of a new apartment house of the size of 2 underground floors, 4 stories above ground, 89 households in multi-family housing, 3 households in neighborhood living facilities, and 7 outdoor households (hereinafter “instant multi-family housing”) (hereinafter “instant new construction project”) at KRW 13.25 billion in the cost of construction (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

On April 17, 2013, when the Plaintiff commenced the instant new construction project in accordance with the instant contract and is proceeding with soil construction, the Defendant attached a notice to the entry of the site of the instant construction project, stating, “Astreh., on April 17, 2013 due to the on-site circumstances, the equipment and vehicles for the suspension of construction during the period of time are removed from the site and taken out from the site to the outside of the site, and accordingly, the Plaintiff suspended and completed the instant new construction project, and subsequently replaced the contractor and resumed the instant new construction project.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 8 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. A claim for payment of price for soil and sand works;

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, at the time of the rescission of the instant contract, the volume of the soil to be removed pursuant to the design drawings of the civil works was 45,654.2 cubic meters. However, the Plaintiff asserts that, as a result of the addition of rock blasting work, etc. during the construction work, the volume of the soil taken out was increased to 86,065 cubic meters, the construction cost was 2,506,691,416 square meters. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the remainder after subtracting the construction cost already paid to the Plaintiff according to the agreement to settle the construction cost based on the volume of the soil taken out based on the number of vehicles.

As to this, the defendant does not have to pay the plaintiff's soil construction cost of KRW 1 billion. Thus, the defendant's soil construction cost of KRW 1 billion is paid to the plaintiff.