1. The Defendant’s KRW 19,195,00 for the Plaintiff and the following: 5% per annum from August 4, 2015 to November 16, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 1, 2015, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for construction of 4,5,6 stories, internal finishings, and outer walls (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the new construction of a multi-household housing in Ulsan-gu C that was contracted by the Defendant from the Defendant on March 1, 2015 by the Defendant.

B. Of the instant construction works, the amount of the structural construction work is KRW 61,050,000, and the Plaintiff completed the instant structural construction work around May 2015.

C. From March 10, 2015, the Plaintiff suspended construction work on May 31, 2015, where the construction cost was not paid by the Defendant while continuing the instant construction work from around March 10, 2015.

At the time of the discontinuance of the instant construction work, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 32,500,000 out of the construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 7, fact-finding results against the head of Ulsan Dong-gu, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The facts that the price for the instant structural construction is KRW 61,050,000 do not conflict between the parties. 2) Of the instant structural construction, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the costs of the instant structural construction to the Defendant out of KRW 61,050,000, the costs of the instant structural construction, and that the Defendant did not agree to pay the costs of the instant structural construction to the subcontractors, and that the amount that the Defendant paid to the subcontractors should be deducted from the Plaintiff’s claim.

There is no evidence to acknowledge the agreement as alleged by the plaintiff.

However, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the remainder after deducting the above amount from KRW 61,050,00,000, the amount equivalent to each of the above expenses out of the aggregate construction of this case, which is KRW 14,025,00.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the amount equivalent to each of the above costs paid by the defendant should be deducted from the claim amount of the plaintiff, and as shown below, the above amount equivalent to each of the above costs should be deducted from the claim amount of this case.