The defendant.

A. On February 17, 2016, the Defendant, a comprehensive construction company, awarded a contract for the new construction of the Ulsan-gu Dart Maintenance Factory from Ulsan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “F”). On June 29, 2016, the Defendant, a specialized construction company, determined and subcontracted the payment for the construction work of KRW 102,30,000 (including value-added tax) to the Plaintiff, who had engaged in construction business, interior fishing, etc. under the trade name “F”.

B. On November 2016, the Plaintiff completed the additional construction, such as additional construction in accordance with the design modification, door doors, etc. (hereinafter “instant additional construction”). On October 10, 2016, the Plaintiff presented a written estimate for the supply value of the additional construction in accordance with the design modification. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff presented a written estimate for the supply value of 47,360,500 for the additional construction following the design modification. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff presented a written estimate for the supply value of 720,000 for the additional construction, including door doors.

C. After hearing the fact of additional construction from E, and around January 26, 2017, the Defendant determined the Plaintiff as KRW 27,500,000 of the total additional construction cost, and paid KRW 11,00,000 among them.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including a provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion was conducted after sending a quotation for additional construction to E, an employee of the defendant's commercial law, and obtaining confirmation from E.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 41,88,550 [the total amount of the additional construction cost = KRW 52,88,550 [the total amount of the additional construction cost = KRW 48,080,500 [the additional construction cost: KRW 47,360,500, which is the additional construction cost due to design modification]; KRW 720,000,000] - the construction cost paid to the Plaintiff 11,00,000];

B. 1) Determination 1) The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (the first seven to the same 17th page).