1. The Defendant’s KRW 37,158,104 as well as its annual 6% from July 17, 2014 to September 17, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 24, 2010, the Plaintiff (Operation C engaged in the business of manufacturing steel structures, piping facilities, etc.) concluded a contract under which the construction period for the construction of a factory on the ground of three parcels, including the ASEAN, in the Asia-si owned by the Defendant (a semiconductor manufacturing business), was fixed from November 24, 2010 to March 15, 201, and the construction price was KRW 190 million (excluding value-added tax) and entered into a contract for the said contract (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On March 201, 201, the Plaintiff completed the construction work of the above plant and the ancillary civil engineering work, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the construction cost under the instant contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2-4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff performed the incidental civil works in accordance with the agreement with the defendant that he would pay the price for the incidental civil works on the face of the week after the execution of the incidental civil works separately from the contract of this case. Thus, the defendant should pay the plaintiff the price for the incidental civil works in KRW 56,069,000 and the delay damages.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant asserted that they agreed separately with regard to the execution of incidental civil works and the payment of the price thereof. When concluding the contract of this case, the contract of this case was determined including the portion of incidental civil works, and the price for incidental civil works claimed by the plaintiff cannot be trusted. Thus, the plaintiff cannot respond

3. Determination

A. First of all, as to whether there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the execution of the ancillary civil works and the payment of the price thereof separately from the instant contract, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) there is no dispute between the parties; or (b) evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 1 and 2, the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole; and (c) there is only the incidental civil works as to the construction specifications related to the instant contract that the Plaintiff gave to the Defendant (Evidence No. 2).