1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant makes an additional determination as to the assertion that is newly known in this court under paragraph (2) below. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion that KRW 15 million was included in the instant construction contract, and KRW 10 million was included in the instant construction contract, as well as the construction cost corresponding to the portion arising out of different specifications and drawings, such as personnel expenses and material expenses for defects in the pre-construction part for which the Plaintiff seeks payment to the Defendant. The Defendant is not obliged to pay the Plaintiff additional construction cost, as it directly pays to the Plaintiff all construction cost under the instant construction contract, including additional construction cost, by preparing a direct payment agreement regarding the Defendant’s obligation to pay the construction cost after concluding the instant construction contract.

B. As seen earlier, the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the direct payment of the subcontract price that B shall pay directly to the Plaintiff according to the instant construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is deemed to have been made, but on the other hand, the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned evidence: (i) the instant additional construction cost is set at KRW 25 million separate from the construction cost under the instant construction contract; and (ii) the said payment agreement explicitly states that B shall pay directly to the Plaintiff the amount that B shall pay to the Plaintiff as KRW 180 million,000,000,000,000; and (iii) the said additional construction cost shall not be included in the construction cost that B shall directly pay to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.