2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant, the building located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (130 square meters; hereinafter referred to as "one building") and the building located in the same Gu (230 square meters; hereinafter referred to as "second building") are awarded a contract for KRW 550,00 per square meter, and the construction of the first building is completed, and the second building is built up to the floor concrete building building. The defendant paid to the plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 80,00,000 in total of the construction cost of the first and second buildings (= KRW 71,50,000,000 (= KRW 550,000) x 130,000) x 8,500,000 of the construction cost of the second building and damages for delay.

B. With respect to the construction of the above 1, 200 won as alleged by the Defendant, the Defendant merely paid the Plaintiff KRW 320,000 per square day, not KRW 550,000 per square day. The Defendant’s construction area related to the building 2 does not exceed KRW 12.32m2 (3.73m2). The construction cost related to the building 1 and 2 is approximately KRW 42,793,600 [ approximately KRW 41,60,00 related to the building 1 x 320,000 related to the building 2 : KRW 1,193,60 related to the construction of the building 1 x 320,000 (=3.73 x 320,000). As the Plaintiff was a person in the complaint at the Plaintiff, there is no reason for the Defendant to additionally pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff in relation to the construction work.

2. First of all, with respect to the construction of the building 1 and 2, the Defendant paid KRW 550,000 per square year to the Plaintiff. Whether the construction cost related to the building 2 reaches KRW 8,500,000 per square year is not sufficient to acknowledge each of the above facts, and there is no clear evidence that there is objectivity to acknowledge it otherwise. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case on the premise of this, without any need to review it, is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case must be dismissed as it is without merit.