A. The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction of access roads to the electric housing complex development project, and reinforcement soil (hereinafter “instant construction”) executed on the land of 11841 square meters of land in Haan-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, and began the said construction from October 25, 2012.

B. On September 25, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 150,000 to the Plaintiff.

C. On October 5, 2012, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 60,00,000,000, and KRW 40,000,000 on October 26, 2012, and KRW 10,000 on November 28, 2012 (hereinafter “instant KRW 60,000,000”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 3 evidence (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was paid KRW 150,000,000 to the Defendant as advance payment for the instant construction project, and thereafter lent KRW 60,000 to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the above loan amounting to KRW 60,000,000 and delay damages.

B. The defendant's summary of the defendant's assertion was the D's proposal, which introduced the plaintiff, stored KRW 150,000,000 in the name of material cost, etc. for the plaintiff before entering into the construction contract of this case. Since then, the defendant was refunded KRW 60,000 among them due to the defendant's reasons, and did not borrow it.

The Defendant received the instant KRW 60,000,000 and later paid to the Plaintiff if the construction cost falls short of the construction cost. However, the failure of the Plaintiff to pay the construction cost is merely equivalent to KRW 80,000,000, and thus, the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the construction cost further to the Plaintiff.

C. The facts acknowledged prior to the judgment, the non-contentious facts, the entries in Gap 4 through 7, the testimony of the witness D, the results of the appraisal commission and the results of the appraisal supplementation for appraiser E, the following circumstances acknowledged pursuant to the overall purport of the pleadings, namely, the defendant voluntarily entrusted the plaintiff with KRW 150,000,000 as a matter of construction cost, such as material cost, etc.