1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant construction work was performed from May 20, 2016 to September 22, 2017 upon receiving a request from the Defendant for installation of video equipment at the Jeju-do Pling Center (hereinafter “instant construction”). The total construction cost, such as material cost and personnel expenses, is KRW 19,462,616.

However, the defendant paid only KRW 11,00,000 to the plaintiff, and claimed that the remaining KRW 8,462,616 is KRW 8,479,616, and the remaining construction cost is KRW 8,462,616 as a result of the re-calculated, but did not reduce the purport of the claim.

Since the Plaintiff did not pay the remainder of the construction price and damages for delay, the Plaintiff claims the remainder of the construction price and damages for delay.

2. Although the fact that the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to construct the instant construction project does not conflict, the evidence alone submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to recognize that the construction cost of the instant construction project executed by the Plaintiff was KRW 19,462,616, or that the unpaid construction cost was KRW 8,462,616, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

(A) The evidence No. 1 is merely a written estimate and the evidence No. 2, written in the name of the defendant, and according to the evidence No. 4, the plaintiff appears to have written a written estimate several times, and in light of such circumstances, the plaintiff's assertion that an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to confirm the work price is rather difficult to believe). The plaintiff's claim is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.