1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On June 30, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with the Defendant and the Hanam-si (hereinafter “instant construction works”) by setting the construction cost of KRW 400 million and the construction period from July 1, 201 to December 21, 201.

B. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million on June 22, 201, KRW 100 million on August 30, 201, KRW 100 million on October 20, 2011, KRW 50 million on January 9, 2012, KRW 40 million on January 25, 2012, KRW 352 million on February 1, 2012, KRW 52 million on June 22, 2012, KRW 50 million on July 5, 2012, and KRW 20 million on September 20, 2012, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 3

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. As to the claim for the construction cost of this case, the parties asserted that the plaintiff and the defendant set the construction cost of KRW 400 million in relation to the instant construction work. The plaintiff made additional construction work several times, and changed the total construction cost of KRW 576,526,830, and the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 576,526,830, as the above construction work was completed at the end of around 2011. Since the defendant did not pay KRW 31,326,830, among them, he did not pay KRW 31,326,830. The defendant agreed to pay the total construction cost of KRW 31,326,830, including the plaintiff's additional construction cost. Since the plaintiff paid the excessive construction cost to the plaintiff by intimidation, the plaintiff is obligated to return the construction cost overpaid to the defendant, and the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, and there is no further need to consider that there was no further agreement between the plaintiff and the construction work of this case as additional construction cost.

(b) Hanam-si real estate D;