1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Hanjin Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. awarded a contract for the instant construction works, and the Defendant awarded a subcontract for the instant construction works to the Defendant, and the Defendant did not set a construction period for the instant construction works among the instant subcontracted construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) at the beginning of July 2016, and re-subcontracted the Plaintiff as the construction cost of KRW 95 million (value-added tax separate). The Plaintiff completed the instant construction works, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff both the construction cost of KRW 95 million and value-added tax by October 2016, there is no dispute between the parties.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion arose from additional construction costs equivalent to KRW 53,607,40, such as additional construction costs or personnel expenses, while the Plaintiff was proceeding with the instant construction project, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the said additional construction cost.

B. In order to recognize the claim for additional construction cost of the contractor, there is a separate agreement between the contractor and the contractor on the execution of the additional construction and the payment of the additional construction cost, and where the contract for the construction work is concluded with fixing the total construction cost, the contractor does not have the obligation to pay the contractor the amount exceeding the original construction cost as the construction cost, barring special circumstances. However, if the contractor had the additional construction work under the agreement on the additional construction cost, there is only

However, upon examining all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to perform additional construction works or pay additional construction costs in addition to the original construction works.

It is not sufficient to acknowledge that additional construction costs have occurred, as claimed by the Plaintiff, or as claimed by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them.

3. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed on the ground that it is not reasonable.