1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

purport, purport, and.

1. The scope of the judgment of the court in this case is the main office, ① the payment of the cost for manufacturing the temporary building of this case, ② the removal of the temporary building of this case and the delivery of its site, ③ the payment of the cost for the use of the site of this case, ④ the payment of the cost for the construction of the temporary building of this case, ⑤ the payment of some materials and

On the other hand, the defendant claimed the delivery of corporeal movables and the payment of the user fee for the instant corporeal movables.

The court of first instance rejected the plaintiff's claim for the payment of some material and sprinking head office, and dismissed the remaining claims. Among the defendant's counterclaim, the court accepted the request for delivery of corporeal movables and dismissed the request for the payment of the user fee due to wwned B.

Since the plaintiff only appealed against this, the scope of this Court's trial is limited to ①, ②, ③, ④ and ④ parts and counterclaims.

2. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. As to the claim related to the temporary building of this case, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 6,223,80 and the delay damages for the construction of the temporary building of this case, since the construction of the temporary building of this case and the payment of the price was completed by taking into account KRW 6,223,80 after entering into a contract with the Defendant.

In full view of the evidence No. 4-2, evidence No. 13-2 through 13, and the purport of evidence No. 29 and all pleadings, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 6,223,80 in total for items of temporary building construction cost to the person who is supplied with the Defendant on January 15, 2016; the Defendant refunded value-added tax based on the said tax invoice; and the Plaintiff paid the said money to the Defendant with content certification.