1. The Defendant’s KRW 59,082,58 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from November 15, 2018 to April 20, 2020.

Basic Facts

The name of construction: The construction site location of D New Construction: the period of construction in Jeju City: the contract amount on January 10, 2018, which was completed on September 1, 2017: KRW 452,430,000 (including value-added tax) entered into a contract with the Defendant on August 10, 2017, under which the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the new construction of C Single Housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) on August 10, 2017.

Since then, the Plaintiff and the Defendant changed the completion date into January 31, 2018 on November 16, 2017, and agreed to add some fairness on January 23, 2018, and to change the total construction cost to KRW 558,430,000.

Accordingly, until January 13, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 410,00,000 out of the total construction cost of KRW 558,430,000.

On March 22, 2018, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail stating the cancellation of the construction contract to the Defendant, on the grounds that the Defendant completed construction works not later than January 10, 2018, at least 60% of the pre-determined ratio. The Defendant was served on March 23, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements as to Gap's 2-5 evidence, the ground for claim of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion by the plaintiff, the defendant discontinued construction works after completing only about 62.8% construction during the construction of this case, and the plaintiff cancelled the above construction contract.

Thus, the construction cost paid by the plaintiff exceeding the construction cost according to the above-mentioned rate constitutes unjust enrichment and the defendant is obligated to return it.

The defendant alleged that 90% or more of the construction work of this case was carried out by the defendant.

Judgment

According to the evidence evidence No. 6-3, according to the result of the appraisal commission to appraiser E in Jeju District Court 2018Kaga1055, the fact that the Plaintiff applied for the preservation of evidence is 62.84% as of April 2018 is recognized.

Therefore, the construction cost under the above-mentioned rate of 62.84% = 350,917,412 = total construction cost = 558,430,000 x 62.