1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts without dispute;

A. The Defendants are co-owners of the E-ground reinforced concrete structure and the mentmen’s brick structure and the mentmen’s slab roof 6th floor accommodation facilities (hereinafter “the instant cartel”), and are currently operating the said accommodation facilities at the same time.

B. Defendant C remitted KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff around August 28, 2018.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 100 million from the Defendants’ first of all, on August 28, 2018. The Defendants voluntarily rescinded construction works around September 13, 2018. As such, the Plaintiff voluntarily rescinded construction works around 98,431,30 won [the design cost of KRW 2 million, the removal and temporary construction cost of KRW 76,413,300 [the cost of KRW 57 million [the cost of removal [the cost of KRW 26 million, the installed construction cost of KRW 18 million, the cost of electrical construction, KRW 5 million, the cost of electrical construction, KRW 3420,00)]; the amount of KRW 5,431,300 from the Defendants [the cost of construction cost of KRW 26 million; KRW 36 million; the cost of electrical construction; KRW 3.47 million]; the amount of KRW 3.38,300,300,384,300];

3. Determination

A. In the event that a contract for construction works has been rescinded even, the remuneration to be paid by the contractor shall not be based on the actual cost paid by the contractor, except in extenuating circumstances.

At the time of occurrence of the obligation to pay the construction cost, i.e., the ratio of the expenses incurred in the completed portion of the total construction cost to the construction cost that the contractor will complete as of the time of discontinuance of the construction work, to the construction cost already completed, shall be calculated and determined.

(Supreme Court Decision 2014Da11574, 11581 Decided January 12, 2017, etc.). B.

However, in this case, the plaintiff was paid KRW 50 million to the construction cost from the defendants. Thus, in order for the plaintiff to partially accept the plaintiff's claim, the height and height ratio executed by the plaintiff is above 5.5.