The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 18, 2016, the Defendant was awarded a contract for interior works of the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Hotel (hereinafter “instant hotel”).

B. On or around August 19, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract construction contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) and the construction amount stated in the instant construction contract amount of KRW 22,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) from the Defendant for some of the foregoing interior work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) is KRW 24,20,000,000, which added value-added tax to this amount.

was subcontracted to the Corporation.

The specific scope of the instant construction project is as follows.

Scope of construction (the content of construction contract)

1. Construction works for the boundary of asphalts (roading and asphalts);

2. Excellent pipeline works;

3. Waterproof of the floor of the parking lot and construction of high bricks;

4. Collection and alteration of rainwater;

5. The sculptures shall be treated at cost; and

(hereinafter referred to as "the construction works" shall be specified by the number of the above-mentioned paragraphs.

C. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff paid KRW 17,260,000 in total as the construction price of the instant case, KRW 6,600,000 on August 31, 2016, KRW 5,000 on September 20, 2016, KRW 16,600 on September 30, 2016, and KRW 16,60,000 on September 30, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 17,260,000 as the construction price of the instant case. This seems to be due to the fact that the Defendant calculated that KRW 6,60,000, which was paid by the Defendant on August 31, 2016, including value-added tax, was paid KRW 7,260,000, which was the amount of value-added tax.

Since the plaintiff makes a claim in this case by calculating the amount of value-added tax not included, the amount payable shall be adjusted accordingly.

A. The payment was made.

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

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant is fully responsible for the costs of the instant additional works, such as cooking works undertaken by the Plaintiff to settle the instant construction costs and actual expenses, female hosting and boundary stone installation works conducted at the Defendant’s request, and installation works of relocation of boundary rocks after and after the boundary (hereinafter “instant additional works”).