2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On January 12, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for advertising materials, which the Plaintiff would install on the front signboard, rooftop4, entrance signboard, landscape lighting, etc. of the Domoel owned by the Plaintiff at the time of Gyeongnam-si, at KRW 27.5 million (including surtax).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The Plaintiff from January 2016 to the same year in accordance with the instant contract agreement.

2. By the end, the work of manufacturing and installing signboards was completed.

C. In accordance with the instant contract, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 2.5 million on January 13, 2016, KRW 5 million on February 4, 2016, KRW 4 million on February 16, 2016, KRW 6 million on February 19, 2016, and KRW 19.5 million on March 8, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. On January 2016, the Plaintiff received KRW 19,50,000 from the Defendant for the installation of a signboard and received KRW 27,50,000,000 from the Defendant for the payment of the price for the construction work. As seen earlier, there is no dispute between the parties to the agreement to deduct KRW 2,50,000,00,00, which is the value-added tax, from the said construction cost. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the construction cost to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances (=27,50,00 won - KRW 19,50,000 - 2.5 million).

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff should deduct the amount equivalent to the cost of the new construction from the compensation for damages, since there exists a defect that the plaintiff constructed differently from the design design design design design design design design as provided in the contract of this case.

In addition to the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant included the intangibles on the entrance signboard at the time of concluding the instant contract, and the Plaintiff manufactured and constructed the signboard differently from the agreement, such as the Plaintiff’s failure to install the above sculpture, etc., and the signboard installed by the Defendant, the building owner C.