1. The Defendant’s KRW 29,786,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 13, 2015 to November 19, 2015.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. If Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence Nos. 1 show the overall purport of the pleadings, the defendant, on December 22, 2014, ordered construction works (hereinafter referred to as "construction works in this case") with the exception of the portion of civil engineering works among the construction works newly constructed on the ground of Kui-gu, Kui-gu, Kui-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, to the plaintiff on December 22, 2014, with the construction cost of KRW 100 million and the construction period of February 15, 2015. The plaintiff completed the construction works in this case on February 26, 2015. The plaintiff is a person who received KRW 70 million from the defendant among the construction costs in this case. Thus, the defendant, barring special circumstances, is obligated to pay the construction cost of KRW 30 million remaining to the plaintiff and delay damages therefrom.

B. Furthermore, the Plaintiff asserts that, after completion of the instant construction work, the additional construction work was contracted to extend the office on the second floor of the building completed by the Defendant, and completed the additional construction work into the construction cost of KRW 31,451,66, the Plaintiff has the right to pay the additional construction cost of KRW 31,451,66.

Although the plaintiff appears to have completed the additional construction work that expands office on the second floor of the building in this case (the purport of the entire argument), if the plaintiff added the whole purport of the pleading in the statement No. B, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff agreed to allow the defendant to free of charge the additional construction work that expands office on the second floor of the building in this case under a special contract for construction work in this case. In light of the above, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant concluded a contract for the additional construction work in the amount of KRW 31,451,66 for the construction work in this case, and there is no other evidence to support it. Thus, the plaintiff's argument about the said additional construction work is without merit.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The gist of the defendant's assertion.