1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. On December 17, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the construction contract was concluded between C and C, setting the construction cost of KRW 39,200,000,000 for the interior of apartment buildings owned by C and C (hereinafter “instant construction”) and completed the said construction work.

The defendant arbitrarily received the balance of construction cost of KRW 29 million from C and used it as a house purchase fund, etc. The defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff 29 million won and delay damages with compensation for embezzlement.

B. Since the parties to a contract with the Defendant’s assertion C are not the Plaintiff, the Defendant received the construction cost from C as the parties to the contract, not embezzlement of the Plaintiff’s construction cost.

2. According to the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 of the judgment, C transferred the down payment of KRW 10 million of the construction contract to an account under the name of the Plaintiff on December 10, 2014, and transferred only the balance of construction contract payment of KRW 2,900 to an account under the name of the Defendant on December 30, 2014 and on December 31, 2014, and the fact that the Plaintiff managed and supervised the construction site of this case.

However, in the course of the investigation into the case where the plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendant in embezzlement, i.e., "C requested the construction of this case to the defendant, and remitted the down payment to the account under the name of the plaintiff upon the defendant's request." The plaintiff also made a statement in the investigation process as follows: "In the course of the investigation, the plaintiff was given a work order at the site, and the plaintiff was given a work order at the real estate auction while operating the household store with the defendant in a de facto marital relationship with the defendant, and managing the household store together with the defendant, and received profits from the sale of the thesis, but the plaintiff mainly made a work order at the site, and the defendant was responsible for requesting, managing, and managing estimates from human management and human management, and C requested the construction of this case to the plaintiff and the defendant, even according to the plaintiff's above statement."