1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded by this court are all dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On April 25, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant under which the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for the labor part of the installation work of the interior board (hereinafter “instant construction work”) among the construction work of a factory located in D located in D, Kim Jong-si, which was awarded a contract with a limited liability company C, with the content that the Plaintiff would be paid the price according to the construction area of each material (10,000 won per 1 kilometer, 7,500 won, and internal board 6,000 won) (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. From May 1, 2018, the Plaintiff continued the instant construction work, and suspended the instant construction work to a police officer on June 1, 2018.

C. Meanwhile, on June 1, 2018, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million as the instant construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 26,590,200 (i.e., the total construction cost of the Plaintiff’s alleged construction cost of KRW 36,590,200 - the fixed construction cost of KRW 10 million) and damages for delay, since the Plaintiff completed construction of the instant construction project as indicated below.

The construction cost (won) for each 1 square meter in the contents of the installation of an item 724.56 square meters (won) 7,500 square meters (won) 7,500 square meters 5,434,200 2 EPS 100 square meters (1,2 floors) 900.4 square meters (6,000 6,000 5,402,4002,400 3 50 EPS 50 square meters incheon-si 620.4 square meters 6,000 3,722,400 1,074.2 square meters 6,445,200 6,445,200 EPS 50 76,2306,2305 7,005 705 m2050,505 m2,005 m206 m2,500

B. In light of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff suspended the instant construction without completing the construction work. The submitted evidence alone does not specify the part actually executed by the Plaintiff among the instant construction works, and thus, the construction cost for the portion that the Plaintiff completed the construction work exceeds KRW 10 million.