Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) who exceeds the following amount among the part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. In the first instance trial on the scope of this Court’s adjudication, the Plaintiff sought construction cost and additional construction cost according to the construction contract as the main lawsuit. Accordingly, the Defendant set-off against the Plaintiff’s claims for return of unjust profits, and sought damages in lieu of defective repair due to a counterclaim. The court of first instance rejected the Defendant’s counterclaim, and rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for additional construction cost and the Defendant’s counterclaim, respectively, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s remainder of the main lawsuit and the Defendant’s remainder of the counterclaim.

As a result, only the defendant appealed against this part of the loss, this Court's judgment is limited to the part of the additional construction cost cited in the plaintiff's claim and the part of the defendant's counterclaim against the defendant.

2. Basic facts

A. On April 2017, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for remodeling of two-story Housing D located in Busan Seo-gu (hereinafter “instant housing”) (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the name of “G”, and around April 2017, the Plaintiff received contracts from the Defendant.

나. 이 사건 공사계약 체결 당시 원고는 피고에게 아래 표와 같이 9,153만 원( 부가 가치세 별도) 상당의 견적서( 갑 제 2호 증, 을 제 4호 증, 이하 ‘ 이 사건 견적서’ 라 한다 )를 제시하였는데, 피고가 감액을 요청함에 따라 원고와 피고는 이 사건 견적서 항목 중 일부를 공사범위에서 제외하기로 하면서 그 항목 ‘ 비고’ 란에 ‘√’ 표시를 하였고, 총 공사대금을 6,000만 원으로 품 명 금액( 원) 비고 1 층 철거 : 대문, 화단, 방 입구 외 3,300,000 √ 대 문 전동 샷다 3,000,000 √ 셋 방 현관 장식도 아 800,000 셋방 전면 발코니 블럭 미장 700,000 발코니 창호 3,600,000 LED 등, 콘센트, 스위치 외 1,300,000 하 이샤 시 225T 이중창 1,197,000 ABS 도 아 960,000 싱크대 1,800,000 √ 아래에서 보는 바와 같이 위 싱크대 공사는 원고와 피고의...