A. On April 22, 2018, the Plaintiff received a contract from the Defendant on April 22, 2018, for the payment of KRW 62,500,000 in advance of the construction work from the Defendant on April 27, 2018, by setting the construction period of KRW 125,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) among “D (cultural complex medical facilities)” in the Seo-gu Incheon Special Metropolitan City’s “D” (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

Article 5 of the instant construction contract (Evidence 2) of the Plaintiff shall complete the construction by May 5, 2018, and shall notify the Defendant of the completion of the construction, and the Defendant shall complete the inspection within three days, barring special circumstances (Paragraph 1). When the Plaintiff fails to pass the inspection under Paragraph 1, the Plaintiff shall repair or remodel it without delay and undergo re-inspection (Paragraph 2).

B. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on April 30, 2018 and requested the Defendant to undergo a completion inspection following the completion of construction on May 8, 2018, but the Defendant asserted the defects in the part of the Plaintiff’s construction work and did not approve the completion.

C. The amount equivalent to the defect and the defect repair cost of the part of the construction work executed by the Plaintiff is as follows.

(1) In short construction, not more than 2 meters at the distance of the main body between the board of directors and the main body of the board of directors (or the Plaintiff, at the time of the first contract with the Defendant, agreed on two meters at the distance of the main body between the main body of the board of directors and the main body of the board of directors at the time of the first contract with the Defendant. However, in the specific construction process, there was a modified agreement between the main body of the board of directors and the main body of the board of directors to have nine meters a distance between the main body of the board of directors and the main body of the board of directors at the distance of 2 meters. Thus, the Plaintiff’s failure to construct the main body at the distance of 2 meters is not a defective construction or defect. However, it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiff’s assertion by the respective descriptions of the evidence No. 14, which appears consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion, as stated in the evidence No. 10 and 13, are insufficient).