1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the court has cited the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case are stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition or dismissal as follows:

Article 12 of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter referred to as the “State Contracts Act”), Articles 51 and 75 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 25 of the Special Conditions on Purchasing Goods, and Article 26 of the General Conditions on Purchasing Goods (Manufacture), shall be added to Chapter 3 6 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 4-18 main part of the 14-18 main part is "(A) although it is recognized that the Plaintiff received a claim equivalent to the principal and interest on the repayment of the guaranteed amount from the capital goods mutual aid association and paid a sum of KRW 240,176,923 from June 14, 2013 to August 16, 2013, which was after the filing of the lawsuit in this case, the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to pay the indemnity to the capital goods mutual aid association without the Plaintiff’s liability to compensate for damages related to the contract in this case as alleged by the Plaintiff. Therefore, even if the Plaintiff responded to the claim for reimbursement against the capital goods mutual aid association, it is difficult to view that the Defendant gains a substantial amount of the indemnity without any legal cause, and thus, it is not possible to file a claim for return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant)."

Part 6, 11, "At the time of entry, etc., in evidence Nos. 9, 10, 11, and 22 of A," and 12 of "after the 12th "Mison", respectively, are added according to the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 8 and 12 of A.

CHAPTER 6: 15. The following shall be added:

The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's demand for the increase of the contract deposit without extending the contract term is illegal, and therefore the difference between the original contract deposit of KRW 118,49,99,998 and the increased amount of KRW 236,99,996 is invalid, but the part corresponding to the difference between KRW 1 and KRW 1.