1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

1. The following facts may be acknowledged either as a dispute between the parties or as a whole in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 6, and Eul evidence Nos. 12 to 14:

D On July 11, 2013, the construction period of the newly constructed urban-type residential housing of 28 households (hereinafter “the instant building”) with five stories above the land of 493 square meters in Seosan-si, Seosan-si (hereinafter “F”) entered into a construction contract with a limited partnership F (hereinafter “F”) with the content that the construction cost shall be determined as KRW 760 million (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) from July 16, 2013 to December 15, 2013, and the construction cost shall be determined as KRW 760 million (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply).

B. On July 15, 2013, G subcontracted the construction cost of the said new construction to G in KRW 690 million. G around August 2013, G re-subcontracted the Plaintiff with KRW 460,000 per square meter for total construction area of KRW 238 square meters and KRW 50,000 for total construction area of the said new construction work, and KRW 460,000 per square meter for total construction area of KRW 238.

C. The said new construction was interrupted when only the basic civil engineering works, the structural construction works for the first floor of the instant building, and the construction works for 2nd floor and reinforced concrete were completed, and D rescinded a contract for construction work on May 7, 2014.

On October 10, 2014, D entered into a contract for construction with the Defendant, etc. to set the construction cost of the remaining portion of the new construction of the building in this case as KRW 830,000,000.

E. The Defendant, etc. concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Plaintiff to the effect that he subcontracts the structural part of the structural part of the instant building (hereinafter “instant construction”) at the time of the conclusion of the said construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

F. Around December 2014, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction, and the Defendant et al. raised an objection to the method of receiving the construction cost and suspended the construction of the instant building.

G. The Plaintiff received KRW 1 million around January 20, 2015.