1. The Defendant’s KRW 24,429,00 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from January 27, 2015 to February 18, 2016.

Facts of recognition

On December 11, 2014, the Plaintiff was selected as a contracting party in the bidding procedure for three installation works of children's play facilities for the new and secondary secondary apartment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction works”). On December 11, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into the instant construction contract with the Defendant by determining the price of KRW 106,00,000 (excluding value-added tax), period from December 11, 2014 to January 26, 2015.

The main contents of the contract are as follows:

The construction contents: The construction methods in accordance with the public announcement of tender and the site site descriptions of the new and new sub-permanent apartment, and additional explanation: The plaintiff must use the registered product and the product that has obtained safety certification from the Public Procurement Service.

The construction plan shall be based on the construction plan, and if there is any change, he/she shall consult with the defendant.

On January 26, 2015, the Plaintiff was issued a certificate of completion of the instant construction on January 27, 2015.

The Plaintiff received payment of KRW 42,400,000 (excluding value-added tax) from the Defendant on December 18, 2014, and received KRW 74,200,000 in total from March 10, 2015 (i.e., KRW 42,400,000 (= KRW 31,800,000).

【Unless there exist any special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the payment for the work price of KRW 31,80,000 (=106,000,000 - 74,200,000) and damages for delay, barring any special circumstance, according to the fact that there is no dispute, each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 through 8, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that the difference in the cost of construction should be deducted from the construction cost, on the ground that the Plaintiff, at the time of the bid for the instant construction project, had to execute the products of another company, which is not the products, and had been executed differently from the drawings in the construction part. However, at the time of the bid for the instant construction project and the construction contract for the instant construction project, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to perform the construction as the products of Lesler.

It is recognized that the plaintiff or the plaintiff had constructed it differently from the drawing without the defendant's consent.