A. On May 26, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied incidental civil engineering works from the Defendant to KRW 205,00,000 for construction cost (excluding value added tax) among the construction works for the new construction of Pyeongtaek-si ground repair plants. After that, the Plaintiff received supply of KRW 17,00,00 for the reinforcement works, in addition to the aforementioned construction works, for KRW 25,00,000 for the access road packing works, and for the installation works for the reduction of contamination in KRW 7,00,000 for each of them.

However, the Defendant paid the construction cost of KRW 240,000,000 as value-added tax, and the remainder of KRW 14,000,000 as value-added tax [the total construction cost of KRW 254,000,000 as value-added tax ( KRW 17,000 as value-added tax ( KRW 17,000 as value-added tax ( KRW 25,000 as value-added tax ( KRW 240,00 as value-added tax)) for the purpose of paying the remainder of the construction cost of KRW 14,00,00 as value-added tax ( KRW 240,00 as value-added tax ( KRW 14,00,00 as value-added tax) for the purpose of this Act)]. As such, the Defendant sought payment of the construction cost of KRW 14,00,000 as value-added tax and damages for delay for its payment.

B. The Plaintiff received KRW 205,00,000 for incidental civil works from the Defendant on May 26, 2016, when there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment, or according to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 through 3, and the entire purport of the arguments, the Plaintiff received from the Defendant on May 26, 2016 the supply of KRW 205,00 for incidental civil works among the new construction of Pyeongtaek-si ground maintenance factories, other than the aforementioned construction works, and received the supply of access road and access road packing works, and the Plaintiff completed the incidental civil works and reinforcement soil works and access road packing works, and the Defendant paid KRW 260,00,00

However, even if the above evidence showed Gap evidence Nos. 2-4 and Gap evidence Nos. 5 (including paper numbers), it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff received from the defendant the reinforcement soil work in KRW 17,000,000, and the access road packing work in KRW 25,000,000, respectively, for the purpose of KRW 7,000,000, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

According to the plaintiff's assertion, the defendant's construction cost is 240,000.