1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 42,202,50 and interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from June 12, 2018 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a corporation that runs the electrical construction business, etc., and the defendant is a corporation that runs the construction business.

B. On June 23, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract construction contract with the Defendant for the subcontracted construction contract with the construction cost of KRW 179,532,469 (=163,211,36 + 10% of value-added tax) with respect to the “telecommunications and Fire Fighting System on Large-Scale of D Funeral Home” located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant construction contract,” and “basic construction”) and the amount of the aforementioned electrical construction payment is KRW 100,936,932, and the warranty bond rate prescribed in the said construction contract is 2%.

C. The instant construction contract stipulated under the general terms and conditions of the private construction contract, and the said construction contract was accompanied by a detailed statement of calculation concerning the size, unit, and quantity by design drawings (hereinafter “instant design drawings”) and materials (hereinafter “instant detailed statement”).

The Plaintiff started the instant basic work, and during that process, there were parts that were not included in the design drawings prior to the instant change, or that were constructed due to changes in the said design drawings, and the design drawings were prepared after the instant change indicated as a separate indication.

E. After completing the construction, the Plaintiff calculated the cost increased by additional construction as KRW 31,815,566 on October 18, 2017 (including value-added tax) and submitted to the Defendant a detailed statement of change in the content of the construction that increased the total construction cost as KRW 211,348,035, based on the basic construction cost calculated as KRW 179,532,469 (including value-added tax).

F. On May 30, 2018, the Defendant reported the amount of additional construction works to the Plaintiff who did not reach an agreement on the settlement of accounts with the Defendant. Therefore, prior to the agreement on the settlement of accounts by adding or adjusting the amount, the Defendant did not have the intent to pay the construction cost and the obligation to pay the said amount.