On November 20, 2018, between the plaintiffs and the defendant, the contract for the 1st floor building and the 2nd floor housing remodeling project located in Gohap-gun D.

In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of monetary obligation, if the plaintiffs, who are the debtor, specified the first claim and denied the fact that the cause of the obligation occurred, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of proving the fact that the legal relationship exists. However, the defendant asserted the content of the plaintiffs' assertion in this case, and there is no specific proof as to the existence and scope of the claim for construction price against the plaintiffs in relation to the construction work

Therefore, it is recognized that the obligation of the plaintiffs to pay the construction price to the defendant in relation to the construction work stated in the order does not exceed KRW 187,300,000 as the plaintiffs are the plaintiffs, and as long as the defendant contests this, the benefit of confirmation is also recognized.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.