The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following parts and the judgment as set forth in paragraph (2). As such, this part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, “165 million won” of the 21st page 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, refers to “165 million won” as “165 million won.”

② On the 6th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, “the construction cost under the instant contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant” in the 3rd instance, shall be deemed as “the construction cost under the instant contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.”

(3) On the 6th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, “not later than the time the defendant brings in the roof materials, which are the finishing materials of the instant construction project.”

2. The addition;

A. The Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal did not complete construction works on the pertinent portion, even though the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant a down payment of KRW 16.5 million and the construction cost to be paid at the time of ordering basic aggregates and f.6 million pursuant to the instant contract.

The construction process until "the time of ordering a foundation foundation and tree material" shall be deemed to include temporary and basic construction, telecommunications and equipment construction, roof and second floor brick construction, and each of the above construction works has not been completed. The Defendant suspended construction upon requesting the Plaintiff to pay the construction cost.

This constitutes a delay of performance due to the defendant's cause.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to “the time of bringing in finished materials,” the following process, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have a cause attributable to the suspension of the instant construction work.

Therefore, the plaintiff cancelled the contract of this case on the grounds of delay in the performance of the defendant. The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 1,712,800,00 as the restoration to original state following the rescission of the contract of this case and KRW 2.3 million as the damages.

B. Determination Doesck;