1. The Defendant’s KRW 71,766,207 as well as 6% per annum from September 1, 2016 to January 10, 2018, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 11, 2015, the Defendant, who is engaged in civil engineering and construction business, supplied C Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”) from Gangseo-si to KRW 1,676,797,070 (including value-added tax).

(hereinafter “instant construction contract”). B.

After the construction cost of the instant construction project, it was modified in order to KRW 1,715,362,070 (hereinafter “the first modified contract”) and KRW 1,82,583,770 (hereinafter “the second modified contract”).

C. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction at the instant construction site and completed the completion inspection on August 31, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's evidence, Gap's 11, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff settled the actual cost of the insurance premiums other than industrial accident insurance premiums, safety management expenses, environmental preservation expenses, and construction machinery guarantee fees from the Defendant, and value-added tax separately paid only the details issued by the tax invoice, and charged the instant construction work with the construction cost of KRW 1,189,00,000, including the remainder of the construction cost, labor cost, and labor cost. Following the 1,319,338,727, whichever increased through the 1,247,572,527, among the construction cost to be paid according to the 1,319,319,338,727, the Defendant paid 1,247,57, and did not pay 71,76,297 won for the remainder of the construction cost. The Defendant was obligated to pay the remainder of the construction cost to the Plaintiff on November 21, 2017, and did not reduce the remainder of the construction cost, but did not reduce the purport of the claim.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion 2) paid the amount of KRW 3 million per month by employing the Plaintiff as the site director, and if the Plaintiff completes the construction for construction cost not exceeding 78% of the value of supply as an efficient progress of the construction, the difference should be paid as piece rates.