1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 9, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for the construction of the instant electrical construction (hereinafter referred to as “instant electrical construction”) with respect to the electrical construction during the instant construction period (hereinafter referred to as “instant electrical construction”) by concluding a subcontract for the construction (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction contract”) with the terms of subcontracting between March 9, 2015 and April 30, 2015 (excluding value-added tax) and the construction period from March 9, 2015 to April 30, 2015.

B. The instant electrical construction was completed on July 2015.

C. On April 27, 2015, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 61,00,000,000 as the instant electrical construction price, respectively, and KRW 24,100,00 on July 27, 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 3, 5, and Eul No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, in addition to the instant construction contract, concluded an additional construction contract of KRW 54,00,000 with the Defendant, and completed both the instant construction and additional construction works. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 84,30,000 for the construction cost, excluding the construction cost of KRW 85,100,000 for the remainder of the construction cost that was paid to the Plaintiff (i.e., the construction cost of KRW 110,000 for the instant construction contract - KRW 59,40,000 for the additional construction cost of KRW 85,100,000 for the construction cost of KRW 5

B. We examine the judgment on the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim. Each statement on the evidence Nos. 2, 7-1, and 6 of the evidence Nos. 7-1 and 6 was concluded separately between the original Defendant and the Defendant regarding the above additional construction.

The plaintiff's assertion of the additional construction works is without merit, since it is insufficient to recognize that the additional construction works were conducted, as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance to the Plaintiff, the Defendant calculated by deducting KRW 85,100,00,000 from the construction amount under the instant construction contract, 110,000,000, which was paid to the Plaintiff.