1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs reinforced concrete construction business, etc., and the Defendant is an individual business operator who runs interior construction business under the trade name of “D”.

B. The Defendant contracted the construction of a 4th floor neighborhood living facility building (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land in the Guri-si F (hereinafter “instant construction”). On March 16, 2018, the Defendant concluded a contract for the instant construction work with the Plaintiff at KRW 417,00,000 for the instant construction work.

C. Around August 2018, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work and received construction payment from the Defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In addition to the instant construction, the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff sought payment of the amount equivalent to KRW 46,570,000 for the said additional construction cost, since the Plaintiff, in addition to the instant construction work, was the construction work, etc. for the fourth floor and the 4th floor balcony Ty, the construction work for the balcony Tyle and the 4th floor care, the toilet Kyle construction and sewage construction work, and the steel construction work, etc.

The defendant asserts that the additional construction work of the plaintiff's assertion is included in the construction work of this case, so it cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

B. The judgment is based on the following: (a) most of the additional construction items asserted by the Plaintiff were the construction details that must be necessarily completed in the construction process of building the instant building; (b) the testimony of the witness G and the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 (including the paper numbers) and evidence Nos. 10 and 11, which appear to be unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff was the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the additional construction work; and (c) accordingly, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff completed the additional construction work; and (d) there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s aforementioned additional construction assertion is rejected

3. Thus, the plaintiff's conclusion is that of this case.