1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 28,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from December 24, 2016 to December 21, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 23, 2015, the Plaintiff engaged in construction business, such as indoor decoration, entered into a construction contract with the Defendant, under which the Defendant entered into a contract for additional construction works (i.e., multi-family housing construction works of 1,2, and 3 stories, interior interior interior interior interior interior interior works, roof extension works, etc.) with the construction cost of KRW 280,00,000 (excluding value-added tax), and with the construction period from May 26, 2015 to August 25, 2015 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). On August 222, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for additional construction works (i.e., multi-story construction works, underground floor interior works, additional construction works, external roof construction works, etc.) with the construction cost of KRW 62,00,000,000 (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”).

B. The Plaintiff completed the construction work around December 2015, and received a total of KRW 314,00,000 from the Defendant as construction price.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

가. 미지급 공사대금 청구 부분 1) 위 인정사실에 의하면, 특별한 사정이 없는 한 피고는 원고에게 미지급 공사대금 28,000,000원(= 280,000,000원 62,000,000원 - 314,000,000원)과 이에 대한 지연손해금을 지급할 의무가 있다. 2) 이에 대해 피고는 계약일로부터 3개월 내인 2015. 8. 25.경까지 공사를 완성하기로 명시하였음에도 원고가 2015. 12. 30.에서야 비로소 공사를 완성하였으므로, 통상 관례에 따른 지체상금 42,000,000원(≒ 342,000원 × 123일 × 1/1,000)으로 원고의 공사대금채권과 상계한다는 취지의 주장을 하나, 원고와 피고가 이 사건 공사계약 및 추가계약을 각 체결하면서 손해배상액의 예정으로서의 성질을 가지는 지체상금에 관한 약정을 하였음을 인정할 아무런 증거가 없으므로, 피고의 위 주장은 나아가 살펴 볼 필요 없이...