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

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who runs the artificial park construction business with the trade name of "C," and the Defendant is the owner of the EMel located in "Woo-gun, Hanam-gun."

Contract amount: 147,500,000 won (excluding value-added tax): 50,000,000 won: 60,000 won (payment on April 15, 2014) - Balance: Payment within five days after the completion of construction: The scope of construction from April 1, 2014 to April 30, 2014: as shown in the attached Table.

B. On March 30, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded the following contract with the Plaintiff as the contractor and the Defendant as the contractor for the remodeling project of the said subcontractor (hereinafter “instant construction”).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). C.

The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 70,000,000 in total as construction cost according to the instant contract.

The Defendant, with respect to the foregoing remodeling work, contracted each of F, G, and H the “Foreign Walls Point Construction”, “LED landscape lighting and mobile installation of external standing signboards”, and “boil connection construction” respectively to F, G, and H, and paid each of F to F, KRW 29,000,000, KRW 23,000,000, and KRW 5,000,000 to G, respectively.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 4, Eul 1 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), 2 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) concluded the instant contract with the Defendant on March 30, 2014, and commenced the instant construction work on April 1, 2014, the Defendant did not pay the construction cost promised by the Defendant at any time. The said construction work was modified upon the Defendant’s request and added the volume. In the course of the demand for the construction cost delayed on April 30, 2014 and the consultation on the additional quantity upon the Defendant’s demand, the Plaintiff and the Defendant modified the said contract to “the actual cost settlement agreement with the effect that the Plaintiff shall pay the Plaintiff for profit separate from the actual cost if the Plaintiff completed the construction work by May 12, 2014.”