1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim extended in the trial are dismissed, respectively.

2. This is due to the extension of claims for the costs of appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 22, 2017, the Defendant awarded a contract to E with respect to the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior decoration located in Busan Seo-gu C.

B. On July 2017, the Plaintiff drafted a standard contract for the construction of fire-fighting system installation works (Evidence A No. 1; hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”) that the Plaintiff would receive a contract for the construction cost of KRW 49.5 million (including value-added tax) between police officers and police officers in early 2017.

C. On July 25, 2017, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a standard contract for fire-fighting system installation works (No. 10-5, hereinafter “instant contract”) was made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to receive a contract for the construction cost of KRW 49.5 million (including value-added tax) from the Defendant.

In addition, on August 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a standard contract for fire-fighting system installation works (Evidence No. 3, hereinafter “instant contract”) with the content that the construction cost of the instant case would be increased to KRW 60 million (including value-added tax).

E. On August 24, 2017, after completing the instant construction, the Plaintiff was issued a certificate of complete inspection of fire-fighting systems by the chief of Busan Fire Station.

F. The Plaintiff received, as the instant construction cost, KRW 38,50,000,000 from the E’s account to July 27, 2017, and KRW 11,65 million on August 11, 2017, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 6, 12, and 13 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In the first time, Plaintiff 1 was aware of the exercise of the time when the instant construction project was performed as E and the first contract of this case was prepared, and thereafter, the Defendant came to know that the Defendant was the executory executor, and concluded the instant construction contract with the Defendant by preparing the contract of this case between the Defendant and the Defendant. As such, the Defendant, the contracting party, is 21.5 million won, which is the Plaintiff.