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

A. The plaintiff is a person who runs the business of constructing electrical machinery and equipment in the trade name B, and the defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of installing and operating a tourist accommodation business.

B. On February 28, 2011, the Defendant concluded a subcontract (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff, a part of the construction, for the electrical construction cost of KRW 126,500,000 (including surtax) and the construction period from February 28, 2011 to April 30, 201.

C. According to the instant contract, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff a down payment of KRW 10,000,000 for the intermediate payment on February 25, 2011, including the payment of the down payment of KRW 10,000,000 for the intermediate payment. Ultimately, the Defendant paid the construction payment of KRW 113,70,000 in total, including the payment of KRW 5,000 on June 21, 2011.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1-12 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff completed the construction work under the contract of this case, and the additional construction work equivalent to KRW 38,634,453 at the defendant's request during the construction work of this case. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay the plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 12,80,000 (i.e., the construction cost of KRW 126,50,000 - the amount already paid - KRW 113,700,000) and the additional construction cost of KRW 38,634,453, as stated in the claim of this case (51,434,453).

As to this, the Defendant did not complete the construction under the instant contract even until June 5, 201, which is the hospital opening date, and did not complete the construction under the instant contract, and did not complete the last balance on June 21, 201, and incurred enormous damages to the Defendant since it did not return contact after the last balance. The Defendant completed the construction with the substitute construction cost of KRW 16,371,930, and the additional construction claimed by the Plaintiff did not have any ground and did not consent to the Plaintiff’s claim.