1. The Defendant’s KRW 9,200,000 as well as annual 5% from March 27, 2013 to November 6, 2013 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C were scheduled to marry around May 2013.

B. On March 1, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded the instant construction contract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 9,500,000, and the construction period from March 6, 2013 to March 29, 2013, which was determined by the Plaintiff’s new divorce house (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

C. The Plaintiff remitted the contract deposit of KRW 950,00 to the Defendant on the date of the contract, and paid KRW 4,750,000 out of the contract price on March 10, 2013.

From March 6, 2013, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a fair list of the instant construction works starting with removal works, etc.

On March 14, 2013, the Defendant began to remove the instant construction works.

E. On March 26, 2013, the Defendant: (a) performed daily work in Jeju and Vietnam; and (b) demanded the Plaintiff to pay 30% of the remainder of the construction cost.

When the plaintiff refused the defendant's demand, the defendant notified the plaintiff that he will suspend the construction of this case.

The plaintiff paid 500,000 won to the people who worked for other works.

F. Around May 23, 2013, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant construction was cancelled.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. (1) The Plaintiff Defendant unilaterally waived the construction work without implementing the instant construction contract. As such, the Plaintiff rescinded the instant construction contract.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 6,200,000 (=950,000 won KRW 4,750,000) and damages KRW 3,00,000 as compensation for damages.

D. The Plaintiff did not comply with the instant construction contract, despite the agreement to pay 50% of the construction cost at the time of commencement and 30% at the middle of the construction.

The Defendant did not pay the remainder of the intermediate payment even after completion of 85% or 60% of the instant construction work.