2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On February 2, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the Rotterdam construction with the Defendant separately from the value-added tax on KRW 12,500,000 of the construction cost, and completed the construction work thereafter. The Plaintiff also entered into an additional construction work equivalent to KRW 500,000 of the construction cost.

Therefore, the Defendant paid 13,00,000 won and value-added tax of 1,300,000 won to the Plaintiff, but did not pay 500,000 won and value-added tax of 1,300,000 won to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 1,800,000 and damages for delay.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant set the construction amount of 12,500,000 won including value-added tax in the above construction contract, and there is no fact that they entered into an additional construction contract of 500,000 won.

In addition, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the above KRW 12,500,000 as stipulated in the instant construction contract.

2. Determination

A. If the contractor did not agree to pay the value-added tax in addition to the contract price when concluding the contract for the instant construction contract, it shall be deemed that value-added tax is included in the contract price unless there are special circumstances.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the contract form written by the plaintiff and the defendant entering into a interior construction contract (hereinafter "the instant construction contract") around February 2007, when setting the total interior cost of KRW 12,500,000, and that the plaintiff entered into a guarantee insurance premium receipt for the instant construction contract issued by the plaintiff as of May 15, 2007, stating the contract amount of KRW 12,50,000 as the contract amount of the instant construction contract to the defendant.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined the construction amount of the instant construction contract as KRW 12,500,000, including value-added tax, and Gap.