1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons why this court should explain this part of the facts are as follows: (a) except for the fact that the court changed “the above claims were all dismissed” under the third sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance into “the judgment dismissing all the above claims, which became final and conclusive,” the part of “1. Recognizing the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance” is the same as the part of “the facts recognized” under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to perform each interior works of the instant dental, apartment, restaurant, and commercial buildings (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant construction works”), and to bear the construction cost.

Accordingly, while performing the instant construction, the Plaintiff spent KRW 326,692,760 for construction costs (i.e., KRW 103,424,940 for the instant dental construction costs of KRW 48,641,00 for the instant restaurant construction costs of KRW 146,506,820 for the instant restaurant construction costs of KRW 28,120 for the instant dental construction costs), as seen in the “List of Costs for the instant construction costs asserted by the Plaintiff,” and the Defendant paid only KRW 109,843,650 for the instant dental construction and apartment construction costs.

Therefore, the Defendant did not reduce the claim amount of KRW 231,242,760 as KRW 216,849,110 to the Plaintiff.

(i) (i) 326,692,760 won - 109,843,650 won and damages for delay shall be paid.

B. Preliminary assertion, if the plaintiff would bear the costs of interior works of the restaurant of this case, the plaintiff and the defendant should be deemed to have been in a partnership with the operation of the restaurant of this case. The plaintiff's investment ratio of KRW 146,506,820 paid by the plaintiff for the construction costs of the restaurant of this case and KRW 100,000,000 paid by the defendant as the security deposit for rental of the restaurant of this case.

146,506,820

As long as the relationship of the Dong is terminated due to the closure of the restaurant in this case.