1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 38,660,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the same from March 21, 2013 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. (1) On June 30, 201, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the installation of gas facility works (hereinafter “instant gas facility works”) of the “C charging station” on the ground of the Defendant, the “E charging station” on the ground of the Cheongju-si, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, and the “G charging station” on the F of the Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu (hereinafter “instant gas facility works”).

Since then, the plaintiff and the defendant decided to reduce the construction cost to KRW 63866,00 (including surtax) while the defendant directly performs some of the gas facility works.

(2) The Plaintiff completed the instant gas facility construction from July 6, 2011 to February 7, 2013, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 600 million in total as the price of the said construction.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 7 evidence, purport of whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the payment amount of KRW 38.66 million (63 billion - 600 million) and the damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from March 21, 2013 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day of service of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff, as the day of completion of the construction.

2. Determination on a counterclaim

A. Until September 30, 2011, the Defendant alleged that the construction period of the instant gas facility works was set at 0.15% of the contract amount per day. When delay, the Plaintiff agreed to compensate for delay as 89 days in the charging station and 168 days in the charging station, respectively, and the Plaintiff should pay the Defendant a total of 88,911,90 won compensation for delay.

B. The witness H’s testimony that the Plaintiff and the Defendant seem to have agreed on the construction period of the said two charging stations’ gas facility works until September 30, 201 is insufficient to recognize it by itself without reliance on the statement of evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff completed the said construction works after the said date.