1. The Plaintiff’s construction cost based on the construction contract and its additional construction contract on May 24, 2016 against the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 24, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant for the construction of a new house on the ground C-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 296 million to the Defendant out of the instant construction cost. The sum of the construction cost that the Plaintiff directly handled with respect to the instant construction work, or paid in subrogation of the Defendant, is KRW 23,295,80 (=TV totaling KRW 5,90,000, Internet termination penalty of KRW 220,000, 310,500, 220,000, 1,548,200, 200, 310,000, 310,000, 50,000, 1,548, 200, 9,727,60,00).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The parties’ assertion that ① the construction cost already paid by the Plaintiff, ② the construction cost paid by the Plaintiff directly or by subrogation, and ③ the Defendant’s compensation amounting to KRW 60 million based on the Defendant’s letter of confirmation on June 5, 2017, the Plaintiff asserts that the construction cost payable to the Defendant is no longer nonexistent.

In this regard, the defendant claimed that 63,577,400 won was paid for additional construction costs, and that 63,57,400 won was not liable for damages according to the confirmation of June 5, 2017.

B. As to the unpaid construction cost, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant spent KRW 63,577,400 for additional construction cost, but it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant paid the above amount and performed the additional construction work. There is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

However, the Plaintiff itself recognizes the fact that the Defendant performed some additional construction works, such as fenced construction in the course of performing construction works in accordance with the instant construction contract. Therefore, the amount of additional construction works shall be recognized only for KRW 7,290,000, which is the amount of the Plaintiff’s entity.

Thus, the plaintiff is the defendant.