1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 2, the defendant's name, "B" signed at the defendant's name as "B" (hereinafter "written confirmation of this case") and "the plaintiff was ordered to do so from the defendant, the owner of Guro Building at the time (hereinafter "the building in this case") to do so, and the plaintiff was installed 12 yachts on July 1, 2009 to the second floor of the 2nd floor in the middle of July 2009, and the 830,000 won for the 830,000 won for each opening (83,000 won for 83,000,000 won for the 12th x 12). The plaintiff received construction cost from the defendant, but the plaintiff did not receive construction cost until 200,000 won for 130,000 won for the 3rd construction work."

B. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for 9,960,000 won for the instant construction works, and that the Plaintiff completed the contract, and that the “when the construction is completed and moved in” as stated in the letter of confirmation of this case is an indefinite term for the payment of the price for the instant construction works. At the latest, the construction of the instant building was completed and moved in around July 31, 2014, which is the date of the lawsuit in this case. Even if the party did not move in until then, the period for performance should be deemed to have arrived even if the occurrence of the fact was impossible due to the absence of the existence of the contract (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu10579, Jun. 27, 1989).