1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant: (a) delegated the process of interior works to the Plaintiff, as set forth in the tegrology C and the underground floor D (hereinafter “instant real estate”); (b) accordingly, the Plaintiff paid construction cost of KRW 6,450,00 to the Plaintiff; and (c) accordingly, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff KRW 6,450,000.

2. Determination

A. The facts of recognition ① After acquiring the instant real estate on January 26, 2016, the Defendant delegated the Plaintiff, who disposed of the acquisition procedure, etc. of the instant real estate, with the course of interior construction for the instant real estate.

② Accordingly, around February 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the construction field was KRW 12.8 million and requested the construction business operator E to perform the test work.

③ E는 기존 샷시, 화장실 싱크대, 문짝 등을 철거하여 폐기물을 처리하고, 이 사건 부동산에 설치할 샷시를 가져다 놓았으며, 수도배관공사를 진행하였으나, 공사대금 등에 관하여 이견이 발생하여 원고와 E는 2016. 3. 7. 공사를 포기하고 중단하였고, 피고가 나머지 인테리어 공사를 마무리하였다.

④ E는 공사비 합계 540만 원(수도배관공사 120만 원, 샷시 180만 원, 철거, 욕실, 빗물받이, 중문 50만 원, 폐기물 처리 50만 원, 식대 및 공과잡비 20만 원, 미장 20만 원, 계약해지 위약금 100만 원)을 기재한 견적서를 작성하여 원고에게 공사비를 청구하였고, 원고는 자신의 비용으로 E와 정산을 마쳤다.

⑤ By the end of the suspension, the Plaintiff replaced the gas boiler (50,000 won), the string number height (100,000 won), the water meter and pipe (40,000 won) of the instant real estate, and disbursed each of the above costs.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 7 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant performed or disbursed the real estate of this case to the plaintiff.