1. The Defendant’s KRW 19,255,301 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 2, 2016 to June 13, 2017, and the next day.

1. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on September 11, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction work for the construction work of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the Plaintiff

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. According to the fact that the part of the claim for the remainder of the construction work is recognized, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the remainder amount of KRW 20 million and the damages for delay.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that the part of the claim for the expenses of interior works is as follows.

In other words, apart from the instant building construction contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract for interior works for part of the first floor of the said new building, and the Defendant selected and supplied materials and agreed to settle the costs of materials and construction at the time of completion. As such, the Plaintiff and the Defendant sought payment of KRW 2,025,00 for the cost of interior works.

In light of the fact that the Plaintiff submitted a written estimate (Evidence No. 3-2) and a modified drawings (Evidence No. 2-2) stating specific details and the cost of the construction as the grounds for the Plaintiff’s claim for the construction cost under the above written estimate, it is recognized that there was an agreement on the above written estimate construction separately from the instant building construction contract (the Defendant is not disputing this). However, there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the parties as to the said written estimate with regard to the construction cost, and it is sufficient to support the amount under the said written estimate to the extent ordinarily foreseeable.