beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the reasons stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing this part in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the instant construction was modified and added at the Defendant’s request during the process of the instant construction, and that the instant construction was delayed. However, inasmuch as the construction cost of KRW 3,301,479,157 was incurred, the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 1,380,976,521 (i.e., the construction cost that the Defendant actually executed by the Defendant), among the construction cost of KRW 3,301,479,157 (i.e., the construction cost of KRW 1,920,50,502,636), as claimed by the Plaintiff, and damages for delay.
3. Determination
A. Unlike the construction content of the instant contract, the Plaintiff entered into an additional construction project at the Defendant’s request, and the Plaintiff entered into an additional construction project with respect to the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on which the said equipment was installed (hereinafter referred to as “equipment construction”). The Plaintiff asserts that the expenses incurred by the said alteration and additional construction should also be included in the construction cost actually performed by the Plaintiff in the construction cost.
However, as shown in the Plaintiff’s above assertion, it is insufficient to view that the Plaintiff engaged in the alteration work of pipes through consultation with the Defendant on the ground that there was no additional cost, design, etc. for the alteration work of pipes, and the above description alone is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff engaged in the alteration work of pipes through consultation with the Defendant. The evidence of each of the evidence Nos. 10, 11, 19 (including each on-site work site work site and each number), Nos. 23 and 24, and the evidence of the transaction of pipes construction work.