1. The judgment of the first instance, including the preliminary claim added at the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 2, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a remodeling construction contract with the Defendant, who engages in the construction business, etc. in the name of “C,” and with the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant building”), with the construction cost of KRW 60,00,000, and with the construction period from August 8, 2016 to September 8, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,000,000 for the first intermediate payment of KRW 10,00,000 on the date of the contract ( August 8, 2016), and the second intermediate payment of KRW 10,00,00 for the second intermediate payment of KRW 10,00 during the construction work (the remainder, August 18, 2016),37,000,000 during the construction work period, respectively.

B. Thereafter, around August 17, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to add the toilets and the stalves construction of the second and third floors of the instant building to the toilets and the stalves construction of the instant building, and this part of the construction cost was set at KRW 6,600,000.

C. On October 6, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant again agreed to add a separate pipeline construction work, a water supply interim valve construction work, electrical construction work, etc. to KRW 7,300,00, and this part of the construction cost is set at KRW 7,300,000. The Plaintiff agreed to the effect that “the total construction cost plus the first and second additional construction cost shall be KRW 10,000,000, and the total construction cost shall be KRW 70,000,000,000, and the Plaintiff shall pay the construction cost according to the fairness (rate) and the Defendant shall faithfully perform the construction work by the date of completion of construction, and the Plaintiff shall be liable for delay of construction due to the Plaintiff’s failure to pay the construction cost.”

(a) through (c) above.

The "the construction contract of this case" is referred to as the "the construction contract of this case" in combination with three contracts.

(i) [In the absence of a dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. As the primary claim for the instant claim, even though the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 53,00,000 to the construction cost, the Defendant did not undertake construction to the extent corresponding to the construction cost that the Plaintiff received from the Plaintiff while demanding the Plaintiff to pay the additional construction cost, and the Defendant also subcontracted the entire construction cost to E in violation of Article 29 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.