1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 28, 2015, ADDD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ADDD Construction”) awarded a contract for reinforced concrete construction works, etc. among the construction works of the Gwangju Northern-gu B Center on the ground of the Gwangju Northern-gu District Corporation.

B. On August 10, 2015, the Defendant entered into a responsible construction agreement between D and the Plaintiff, setting the contract amount of KRW 190,000 on August 10, 2015 with respect to the construction works of reinforced concrete 4 marijuana among the said construction works, which was subcontracted with the said construction works.

C. On March 15, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained approval for the removal of all the temporary materials related to the said construction.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Eul 1, 2, 4, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As to the claim for the additional construction cost, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant completed the construction work for installation of Isi (EGI) 4,282,00 won, and the construction work for installation of safety launch board 25,138,000 won, respectively.

However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the construction work was additionally contracted by the Defendant. Even if the construction work was additionally contracted, it is insufficient to recognize whether the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone agreed to receive the payment from the Defendant.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is difficult to accept.

B. As to the claim for damages, the Plaintiff asserts that, as the outer wall construction works undertaken by the Defendant et al., completed more than 78 days and could be dismantled on March 14, 2016, the Plaintiff would have to pay the rent of KRW 13,854,408 to Esethyl Co., Ltd. additionally, the Plaintiff and the Defendant in a contractual relationship with the Plaintiff should compensate the Plaintiff for the said damages.

However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone.