1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company running housing construction business, etc., and the Defendant is a company running real estate development business, etc.

B. On April 28, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the supply of and demand for the extension of the building of the Gwangju Complex on the Seo-gu and two lots of land (hereinafter “instant contract”), Gwangju, Seo-gu, and the said extension work (hereinafter “instant construction”). The main contents are as follows.

Standard contract for private construction works (Evidence A No. 3)

3. Date of commencement: The scheduled date for completion of works on May 2, 2011: The construction cost on August 20, 201: 2,310,000,000 won: 10. The construction cost on August 20, 201; 2,310,000 won; the matters stipulated under a special agreement to the warranty liability period for each type of work (related to Article 68) under the Enforcement Rule of the Act on

1. The aggregate cost of steel materials shall be settled at the market price at the time of purchase of materials; 2. The following shall be settled at the time of change in the quantity of materials to be supplied (such as a window and Aluminium complex board, etc.) due to the change in the drawings of steel framed or a windowing construction (e.g., a settling key).

4. A separate classification of electricity, telecommunications, and fire fighting works.

5. Calculation of the amount on the basis of the detailed statement due to the absence of detailed drawings, and separate settlement of the subsequent additional portions (excluding details);

C. On December 20, 201, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction. On January 10, 2012, the Defendant obtained approval for the use of the building extended by the competent administrative agency for Gwangju Complex (hereinafter “instant building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 6 and 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the construction cost of the instant contract was KRW 5,281,870,000 on August 19, 2011.