1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,002,167 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 21, 2017 to August 10, 2018.

Basic Facts

- On October 24, 2016, the Defendant contracted the Plaintiff with the construction cost of KRW 385,00,000 (including value-added tax) for the new construction work of two factories on the ground of Gwangju City (hereinafter “instant factory”).

- Accordingly, the Plaintiff started the construction of the instant plant, and on December 14, 2016, the Defendant contracted the Plaintiff with the construction cost of KRW 55,000,00 (including value added tax) for additional construction works, including the installation of retaining walls (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

- The Plaintiff completed the instant factory on March 20, 2017.

[Based on the above facts, the plaintiff completed the factory in this case according to the facts as to the non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the whole purport of the arguments, and the contract price as to the claim for the construction cost of the entire purport of the argument, and the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff KRW 440,00,000 for the construction cost as stipulated in

After the construction contract of this case, the Plaintiff sought the payment of the construction cost in addition to the above construction cost, if the Plaintiff constructed the water tank oil tank outside the groundwater water tank with the Defendant’s payment of the construction cost of KRW 2,326,00 upon the Defendant’s request. Accordingly, according to each of the evidence Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7, it is recognized that the Plaintiff paid the construction cost of KRW 2,326,00 and additionally constructed the water tank oil tank outside the underground water tank with the payment of KRW 2,326,00, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed not to demand the Defendant to pay the additional construction cost of KRW 55,00 on December 14, 2016, considering the overall arguments in the evidence No. 2 and No. 1 evidence No. 1.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

(2) the payment of the cost of construction;