1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person engaged in interior fishery under the trade name of “B”, and the Defendant is a juristic person engaged in coffee and food distribution and sales business.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the interior works of the interior works of the interior works of the DNA branch (hereinafter “instant construction”) on the D points due to the C and C mobile underground 121 in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, the Defendant’s operation. The Plaintiff completed the said construction works around March 2017.

C. On January 26, 2017, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 20 million as the instant construction cost, KRW 10 million on February 15, 2017, and KRW 40 million on March 30, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff’s Defendant entrusted the instant construction work with KRW 58 million and completed the construction, it is obligated to pay the unpaid construction amount of KRW 1,6710,00,000,000,000 to KRW 900,000,000,000,000 for subcontracting households (i.e., KRW 40,000,000,000).

B. As to the instant construction work between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff agreed to KRW 1.5 million per square day on KRW 26,000,000 for KRW 40 million, and as long as all payments have been made, there is no construction cost that the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff.

3. According to the evidence No. 1 written by the Plaintiff, it is recognized that the Plaintiff written a written estimate for the Defendant on March 24, 2017, stating the amount of the construction cost of KRW 58 million and the balance of KRW 16.71 million.

However, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on the construction cost of this case at KRW 58 million only with the evidence of the Plaintiff’s submission and the testimony of the witness E of the trial party, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged in full view of the statement No. 1 of the evidence No. 1 and the testimony of the witness F of the first instance trial, namely, the Plaintiff’s brand G store and H store prior to the instant construction work.