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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. From around 2014 to 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on the part of the indoor construction contracted by the Defendant with the Plaintiff on the part of the construction subcontracted to the Plaintiff, and the construction cost was at KRW 80,000 per square year or KRW 90,000 (where the installation of a squad is necessary), and the minimum construction area was at 15 square meters.

B. The plaintiff performed the electrical ship construction in accordance with the above contract. The defendant is obligated to pay the total construction cost of KRW 20,151,000 and delay damages.

2. The plaintiff seeking the payment of the non-paid construction cost to the defendant must prove the existence and scope of the non-paid construction cost under the principle of burden of proof, and as a premise therefor, it should be confirmed that the construction cost is KRW 80,000 or KRW 90,00 per annum. Accordingly, it is insufficient to recognize that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant as to the construction cost as KRW 80,000 or KRW 90,00 per annum. The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.