1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the plaintiff's claim expanded and reduced in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. On April 27, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant, who is engaged in tegypt fishery in the name of “C” and the Plaintiff’s indoor interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior apartment E of Busan, Busan, which is owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant construction”). On the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to proceed with the construction cost of KRW 35,250,000 (in addition, the cost of the wall material of the Agypt). In the event of nonperformance of contractual terms on the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a construction performance confirmation (hereinafter “instant confirmation document”) with the intent to compensate for the double amount of the construction cost. The Plaintiff paid KRW 12 million to the Defendant as the down payment.

B. The terms and conditions of the contract pertaining to the Washington during the instant construction are as follows.

6. Doing F Company G in Grade 6.

H. Change to the color to the HS Ston (Amond Cream), Rascar color of I Washington.

C. In the event that the construction of the Washington is carried out under the instant construction contract, the total construction cost of the Washington is KRW 6,650,000, and among them, the construction cost of the HS metric tons is KRW 1,800,000.

The construction of the instant construction was executed as a product processed with five pages of seals, such as the top, lower, token, and backboard, etc., and the upper tin was constructed as a INSton rather than the HS Ston upon the Plaintiff’s request for a change in the color of the seat.

E. Around May 26, 2016, the Defendant completed the instant construction, and the Plaintiff paid total of KRW 35 million to the Defendant, including the down payment already paid by paying KRW 12 million on May 10, 2016, KRW 5 million on May 21, 2016, KRW 5 million on May 21, 2016, and KRW 6 million on May 26, 2016.

Therefore, the unpaid construction cost still remains 2.50,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the construction of this case is lower than that of the terms of the contract, the defendant is at the level below that of the HS Ston. The plaintiff's assertion is at the level below that of the HS Ston.