1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. On September 16, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the construction work was contracted to remodel the Defendant and the Jeju-si Apartment 201 Dong 804 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant contract”). The construction cost was set at KRW 27,000,000.

Accordingly, the plaintiff implemented remodeling construction for the apartment of this case, and only completed work such as painting construction on December 3, 2015.

On December 3, 2015, the Defendant promised to pay the additional construction cost to the Plaintiff on December 3, 2015, and demanded additional construction, such as reconstruction such as drawing of the dwelling space and room walls, toilet receipt room, and replacement of other days, among the instant apartment buildings, and the Plaintiff completed the additional construction on December 6, 2015.

Since then, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to perform additional works for the construction of ecocarte, the entrance of toilets, balconys, and the entrances, etc. of the port entrance, and completed the said construction on December 11, 2015 and on December 12, 2015. Upon the Defendant’s request for revision, the Defendant conducted work on the installation and modification of the aforementioned construction from December 14, 2015 to December 23, 2015.

As such, the Plaintiff carried out additional construction not included in the instant contract upon the Defendant’s request, and the costs therefrom totaled of KRW 14,400,000, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 14,400,000 and the delay damages therefrom, in accordance with the additional construction agreement.

2. From December 3, 2015, the fact that the Plaintiff, from around December 3, 2015, performed an additional construction project, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion, does not conflict between the parties.

Meanwhile, according to the purport of the entire images and arguments in subparagraph 1-1 through 22 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, it is recognized that there was a defect, such as the defect in the course of the construction performed by the Plaintiff until December 3, 2015, such as the defect in the course of the construction, the defect in the labing, the

In addition, 14,400,000 additional construction cost claimed by the Plaintiff exceeds 50% of the construction cost stipulated in the instant contract.