1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Defendant at KRW 61,00,000,000,000 for the cost of civil works, and the cost of new construction of a building, which is KRW 276,000,000,000 for the construction of a new building, and completed all of the above construction works around September 2010.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above construction cost of KRW 276 million and the above construction cost of civil engineering is not paid. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above construction cost of KRW 61 million and the damages for delay.

B. The Defendant did not have contracted the Plaintiff with a separate set of KRW 61 million for the construction cost of the said civil works. Since the Defendant set the construction cost of the said new building as KRW 276 million, including road construction and site construction works, which are civil engineering works, including road construction and site construction works, there remains no remaining construction cost to be paid to the Plaintiff.

Even if the Defendant should additionally pay the construction cost of civil works to the Plaintiff, the extinctive prescription was completed on December 27, 2009, which was the completion date of construction of the said civil works, or on September 2010, which was claimed by the Plaintiff as the completion date of construction of the said civil works.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the defendant obtained permission for development activities as to the land and one parcel other than Suwon-si, Suwon-si, 2009, and obtained permission for the construction of the building on March 9, 2010, but it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant was awarded a contract with the plaintiff for the construction work of the above land as a separate construction cost of KRW 61 million only with the above facts of recognition and the statement of evidence Nos. 1 and 8, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Rather, according to the evidence Nos. 2 and 2, according to the fact that the plaintiff was awarded a contract with the defendant for the construction work of the building of the building of the building of the building of the facilities for the neighboring neighborhood facilities on the land other than Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and two parcels of land, the plaintiff was awarded a contract with the defendant for the construction cost of KRW 276,00,000,000 for construction work cost of the above neighboring facilities.