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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that he installed pipes using a quality testing product more than that of the general sate, installed a tank more than that of the tank subcontract, and was paid KRW 200 million by the Plaintiff separate from the subcontract price. Defendant Won agreed to perform construction work more than that of the subcontract price, and received KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff separately from the subcontract price. As the Defendants breached the above contract by construction work as set forth in the subcontract, the Defendants are obliged to return the said money received from the Plaintiff as a result of the breach of the above contract or the return of unjust enrichment.

B. In light of the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings in evidence Nos. 1 and 4, namely, there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement related to the addition or modification as asserted by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s on-site supervisionD from the Plaintiff’s witness in the civil lawsuit where Ethy Construction sought payment against the Plaintiff, which was brought by Ethy Construction Co., Ltd., for the payment of the construction cost against the Plaintiff, related to the amount that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendants, too small and medium-sized companies, expressed that the Plaintiff, the ordering person, who was the owner, was the direct subcontractor, paid the additional construction cost to the subcontractor, thereby making the Defendants participate in the subcontracted work. In light of the above, the evidence alone presented by the Plaintiff alone is a better material than that set forth in the instant subcontract.