1. The Defendant’s KRW 76,749,80 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from March 20, 2014 to July 10, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates a creative construction business under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a company engaged in the construction business.

B. From around 2012 to 2013, the Plaintiff performed various construction works by entering into a subcontract with the Defendant during the construction works contracted by the Defendant. The details of the original and miscellaneous construction works subcontracted by the Defendant and the construction cost are as follows.

(1) Construction and remodelling of hotel C (hereinafter referred to as “C hotel”) and construction amount of 153,026,50 won (2) 75,350,500 won in the construction amount of the D coffee shop and construction amount of 59,590,00 won in the construction amount of E, 59,590,00 won in the construction amount of E, 7,593,30 won in the construction amount of F, G field construction, 1,540,00 won in the construction amount of G site

C. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff totaling KRW 220,350,500 with each of the above construction costs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-6, Gap evidence 2-1-3, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the construction cost of KRW 76,749,800 unpaid to the Plaintiff (i.e., total construction cost of KRW 297,100,300 - the construction cost of KRW 220,350,50) and damages for delay.

B. After completion of the construction of a window and miscellaneous steel for a hotel, the Plaintiff asserts that, at the Defendant’s request, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 8,500,000 for the additional construction cost, since the work of replacing the existing windows installed in a corridor, stairs year room, and a green line line room with a project window capable of opening or closing, and a roll-proof net.

The entries and videos of Gap evidence No. 4, Gap evidence No. 7-1 to 3, and Gap evidence No. 8-1 to 5 are merely requests the defendant to replace the existing windows with the project windows that can be opened and closed separately from the existing construction works, and it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff executed them.