1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On September 30, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, on September 30, 2015, have four multi-household housing in Changwon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant multi-household housing”).

2) As to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on the construction cost of KRW 28 million. 2) However, the Plaintiff completed the instant design, but the Defendant paid only KRW 5 million out of the instant design cost to the Plaintiff, and did not pay the remainder of the construction cost.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 23,454,550 for the unpaid construction cost, but according to the facts found earlier, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 23 million (= KRW 28 million – KRW 5 million) and damages for delay. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is reasonable within the scope of recognition as above, and the remainder is without merit.

2. As to the judgment on the defendant's assertion, the defendant argues that the plaintiff did not perform most of the Doing Construction Works as to the 5 units A, A, B, B, B, 202, and 302 among the site of the instant Doing Construction Works, but the entries and images of Eul Nos. 1 through 15 (including the number of pages), are insufficient to reverse the above facts of recognition, and there is no counter-proof.

In addition, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's claim since there are various defects in the family room that the plaintiff completed the Doing Construction.

The above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that there was a defect in the wholesale work executed by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the conclusion of the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable in that the principal amount of the non-paid construction cost to the Plaintiff is 23 million won.

However, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be null and void.