A. On October 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a construction contract with the Defendant as a contractor for a construction project with the price of KRW 228,00,000 [the instant construction project hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant construction project by adding the said three construction works together] among the construction works for building a steel structure (a steel reinforced concrete construction), electrical construction, and installation works (hereinafter referred to as “the instant building”) on the ground, Gangwon-gun’s ground neighborhood living facilities and detached houses (with the second floor management building consisting of one debt and a single floor; hereinafter referred to as “instant building”).

B. From December 2015 to February 2016, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 220,550,000 as the instant construction cost.

C. From March 2016 to June 2016, the Plaintiff terminated the instant construction and delivered the instant building to the Defendant.

On September 12, 2016, the approval for use of the instant building was made.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 7, Eul evidence 13 to 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged in full view of each evidence mentioned in the underlying facts of the claim for the payment of unpaid construction cost and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, ① the building in question, such as ① the completion of the structural part of the structural part of the instant construction at the time of the completion of the instant construction work, and the construction of the instant construction considerably takes place, were the construction of the building in accordance with the terms and conditions agreed upon by social norms. ② Although electrical construction was not considerably completed at the time of the completion of the instant construction, it appears that the Defendant had a dispute with the Defendant, such as filing a claim against the Plaintiff for injunction against obstruction of construction, this is significant.