The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 23, 2018, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for the construction cost of 2.750,000 won for the steel sn beaming construction among the new construction works of the D’s building made by the Defendant in Scheon-si C (including value added tax) after the completion of construction.

B. On October 24, 2018, the Plaintiff completed construction works to protect steel-frame structures by spreading tamperss on steel structure at the steel structure at the construction site of the said new construction site.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1-3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the contract price of KRW 2.75 million to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The Defendant asserts to the effect that “The above subcontract construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff includes bloet exposure to the part scheduled to extend the outer wall of the building in addition to the steel-proof clothes construction work.” The Plaintiff completed only fireproof clothes construction and suspended the remaining construction, and the Defendant subsequently requested another construction business operator to complete the remaining construction, and thus, the Plaintiff did not have a claim for the construction cost due to the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of obligation.”

However, evidence as mentioned above, Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 9 submitted the plaintiff evidence Nos. 8 and 9 as a photograph of the materials and equipment brought into the construction site of this case for the execution of the subcontracted construction of this case, not a photograph of the materials and equipment brought into the construction site of this case.

According to each image and statement, it can be recognized that each of the construction materials and equipment is entirely different, and that only the “fire-resistanting construction work” is stated in the quotation or the contract on the above construction contract provided by the Plaintiff to conclude the above construction contract. Thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is rejected.

3. In conclusion, the defendant seeks construction cost of KRW 2,750,000 and the plaintiff's claim against the plaintiff.