1. The Defendant amounting to KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from July 30, 2015 to June 21, 2016.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the following facts: (i) Evidence A, evidence 5, evidence A, evidence 9, evidence A 10, evidence A 12, and evidence A 12, and the purport of the entire pleadings at each of the statements or videos set forth in evidence A, No. 4, 5, and 9.

① On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to construct a multi-family house (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of Pyeongtaek-si C owned by it (hereinafter “instant contract”).

이 사건 도급계약의 내용은,「㉠ 공사기간 : 2014. 6. 30.부터 2014. 11. 30.까지 ㉡ 공사대금 370,000,000원 ㉢ 대금지급방법 : 계약시 선금 100,000,000원, 골조완료시 중도금 70,000,000원, 준공 후 15일 이내 잔금 200,000,000원 ㉣ 하자보수기간 : 준공 후 2년 ㉤ 기타사항 : 연면적 334.93㎡, 엘리베이터 포함, 가스인입비 포함, 수도인입비 포함, 한전불입금 포함, 도로점용비용 별도, 도면에 의한 시공, 원룸전자제품(세탁기, TV, 에어콘, 인덕션) 포함」으로 되어 있다.

② After that, the Plaintiff discontinued construction and left the site due to differences in the Plaintiff’s opinion on the additional construction cost, the Defendant terminated the instant contract on October 10, 2014, and the Plaintiff completed the structural construction under the instant contract.

According to Gap evidence No. 12, the defendant also acknowledges this fact.

The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff was unable to complete the framed construction because there exist some defects such as lack of telecommunications pipes and lack of ceiling construction for facilities, etc. However, in the case of reinforced concrete structures such as the instant case, it refers to the construction for building the bones of the building by assembling steel bars and building the bricks or concrete walls and floors by breaking steel bars. On the other hand, the Defendant’s assertion is the said construction works.