1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 6,474,390 as well as the full payment from November 5, 2016.

Facts of recognition

On February 26, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff to construct the housing price in KRW 117,000,000 for the housing price on the ground of Gyeonggi-gu Group C.

Since then, the plaintiff completed the construction of housing, and the defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership of the housing on June 13, 2016.

(Reasons for recognition) Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings.

The plaintiff alleged by the parties concerned completed the housing construction project in accordance with the contract with the defendant and the demand for additional construction. Thus, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the total amount of the construction balance and the additional construction cost of KRW 6,474,390.

The Plaintiff did not perform part of the construction work under the construction contract, and supplied the Plaintiff with the purchase by the Defendant.

The Plaintiff should return the said amount to the Defendant on the ground that the portion of the construction cost that was paid by the Defendant was unjust enrichment of KRW 23,391,00 corresponding to the material cost supplied by the Defendant.

Judgment

The main claim and counterclaim are also examined.

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff completed the housing construction pursuant to the construction contract with the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the construction to the Plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff should return unjust enrichment rather than unjust enrichment on the grounds as seen earlier.

However, upon examining the Plaintiff’s complaint, the Plaintiff excluded the purchase price for the part that the Plaintiff performed and did not performed from the balance of the construction contract. Although the purchase price for the materials purchased and supplied by the Defendant was claimed by calculating only the cost of installation, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff was unjust, since the Defendant alleged that the part that was excluded from the claim amount was made by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction work, KRW 6,474,390, and this shall apply.