The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Case summary and judgment

A. The fact that the Plaintiff (contractor) and the Defendant (contractor) entered into a contract for the manufacture and installation of waste by means of incineration (hereinafter “instant contract”) and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 74,300,000 out of the instant contract amount, does not conflict between the parties.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff completed the implementation under the instant contract.

The defendant asserts that the unpaid amount is KRW 5,500,000 (=129,800,000 - 74,300,000) and the delayed damages are claimed.

(b) the responsibility for the assertion for the completion of the work in the contract for work is to the contractor who claims the payment of remuneration for the result of the work, and the date has been completed in the contract for the supply of the production.

In order to do so, it is insufficient to conclude that a series of major structures of the subject matter has been constructed as agreed and have the performance generally required in light of social norms. As such, a contractor seeking compensation for the manufacture of the subject matter must assert and prove not only that the final process prescribed in the contract has been completed in relation to the manufacture of the subject matter, but also that the main structure of the subject matter has the performance generally required in social norms as agreed upon (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da21862, Oct. 13, 2006; 2017Da272486, 272493, Sept. 10, 2019). Comprehensively taking into account the purport of pleading as a result of the appraiser C’s request for appraisal by appraiser C (the main contents are as stated in the separate sheet), the Plaintiff’s absence of incineration, absence of equipment at the time of combustion, lack of equipment and lack of equipment, etc. due to the Plaintiff’s lack of equipment and lack of equipment.