1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amount among the parts concerning the principal lawsuit exceeds the amount ordered to be paid.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company primarily engaged in the cludio construction business, and the Defendant is a foundation that operates D Hospital located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si C (hereinafter “D Hospital”).

B. On January 23, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant and the instant hospital with regard to the construction of a new ward ward and the central supply room among the existing ward units, the construction period from February 1, 2017 to March 31, 2017, with regard to the construction of a stem cell laboratories and the sound pressure isolation ward construction of a patient room among the six floors, with regard to the construction of a stem cell laboratories and the six floors, with the construction period of the contract with the amount of KRW 438,90,000 (including value-added tax).

(hereinafter “instant construction contract”). C.

During the construction of the instant hospital, the Plaintiff completed the construction of four operating rooms, stem cell storage rooms, stem cell laboratories, the new construction of the corridor of the operation room, and one repair work of the operation room among the existing wards of the instant hospital, and transferred the construction site to the Defendant on March 24, 2017 along with the completion book.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to suspend the instant construction without the repair work of the existing bottled room and the recovery room of the instant hospital, and the construction work of the patient room and the patient room with six floors of the hospital (hereinafter “the instant unexecution part”).

On May 11, 2017, the Plaintiff issued a written estimate to set the Plaintiff’s non-execution cost of KRW 12,000,000 to the Defendant; the Plaintiff’s written claim for construction cost of KRW 76,00,000 remaining construction cost on May 12, 2017; and the written report on the Plaintiff’s construction cost of KRW 76,00,000 to the Defendant on May 13, 2017, respectively.

The defendant's architectural adviser E received the above report and stated "the receipt of sets and settlement documents" in three pages of the report.

E. By March 13, 2017, the Defendant paid KRW 352,00,000 to the Plaintiff as the instant construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, 6, 12 through 14, and Eul evidence No. 6.