1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of the parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was, around December 30, 2016, detained in the criminal case on February 14, 2017, when the Plaintiff was requested by four building owners, such as Gangnam-gu Seoul Northerndong, to construct a new building and started construction work from January 1, 2017.

Upon detention of the plaintiff, the plaintiff's wife D continued the above construction, and the defendant was awarded a contract for the facility work from the plaintiff and threatened him with the advance payment, thereby deceiving 34,510,000 won.

In addition, the defendant did not damage and connect septic tanks at the construction site above, and the plaintiff released them on bail on August 30, 2017 and spent not less than 27,000,000 won for reconstruction costs.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 61,510,000 won in total and damages for delay, which are the sum of the construction cost acquired through deception or by deception from the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) the Plaintiff served as the field supervisor at the construction site four construction sites; and (b) the Plaintiff would receive remuneration of KRW 3,000,000 per month from the Plaintiff.

(A) In addition to the instant construction work, the Defendant performed the Defendant’s duties at the four construction sites even after the Plaintiff was detained. However, even after the Plaintiff’s detention, the Defendant had no choice but to waive the role of the head of the field office due to the Plaintiff’s non-payment of construction materials and personnel expenses.

The Defendant received KRW 23,400,000 from the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff’s wife with respect to the instant construction work, and disbursed KRW 24,541,50 for the progress of the said construction work, and the Defendant did not receive any remuneration of KRW 3,00,000 per month paid to the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

2. Around December 2016, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract for a new building construction work from each owner of the building in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, the E, F, the Seoul Northern-gu G, and the Gangnam-gu Seoul Northern-gu H.