A. As indicated in the table below, the Plaintiff receives stone construction work of KRW 429,200,000 (hereinafter “instant construction work”) from the Defendant, and completed all of the construction work.

The construction cost (cost) as of July 20, 2015, A Multi-household New Construction Works 74,000,000,000 on August 20, 2015; 45,700,000 New Multi-household Construction Work 45,700,000 on March 9, 2016; 70,000,000,000 Multi-household New Construction Work on March 9, 2016; 50,000,000,000 Multi-household New Construction Work on March 9, 2016; 67,30,000,000,000 for the aggregate of the additional construction works of F Multi-household New Construction Work on February 25, 2016; 2,200,000 aggregate of the aforementioned construction works

B. On February 2, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled the instant construction cost of KRW 427,00,000,000, except for additional construction works, and the Defendant drafted a settlement agreement with the Plaintiff to pay the said price to the Plaintiff separately by 5%.

C. From August 5, 2015 to April 26, 2016, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 405,00,000 as the instant construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 45,660,000.

B. As to this, the part of the above settlement agreement that the Defendant separately pays 5% of the construction price (hereinafter “the contract of this case”) is a business for which value-added tax is not imposed, and thus, the contract of this case is null and void, or its value-added tax is imposed, and its cancellation is cancelled on the ground of the Plaintiff’s expression of intent or mistake by deception, and the Plaintiff additionally repaid the amount of KRW 4,400,000 in addition to the amount of the Plaintiff’s repayment, and ③ the defect occurred in the part of the construction of this case, it is asserted that the damage claim in lieu

3. Determination

(a) Determination on the cause of the claim;