1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings on the entry of evidence A No. 1-1:

On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction of “sea fishing place” (hereinafter “instant construction”) in Incheon-gun, Incheon-gun, and entered into a contract for the construction works (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the following contents:

C

B. The instant construction was completed on May 2017, and the Defendant currently operates the “D Sea Fishing Place”, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 535,00,000 in relation to the instant construction.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the construction cost under the instant contract is KRW 470,00,00 and the additional construction cost is KRW 84,700,000,000, and the total construction cost including value-added tax (hereinafter “value-added tax”) is KRW 610,170,000, and the Plaintiff was paid KRW 535,00,000 from the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 75,170,00 (including value-added tax) for the unpaid construction cost.

B. Article 31 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that an entrepreneur shall collect an amount equivalent to the value-added tax from the person who receives the supply of goods or services, merely declares that the entrepreneur will ultimately bear the amount equivalent to the value-added tax collected from the person who receives the supply of the goods or services in turn. If the entrepreneur does not have a judicial right to directly collect the amount equivalent to the value-added tax from the person who receives the supply based on the above provision, and if there is a separate agreement between the parties to the transaction to bear the value-added tax, the entrepreneur shall pay the amount equivalent