1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is co-owner of the land C at both weeks (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant is a person who actually operates a construction business entity D.

B. On March 7, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant on March 7, 2018 (hereinafter “instant extension construction”).

(2) On March 21, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to set the contract amount of KRW 25 million (excluding value-added tax) and the period of construction up to March 20, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). On March 21, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to set the printing panel construction project (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction project”) as the contract amount of KRW 25 million (excluding value-added tax) and the period of construction up to March 31, 2018.

3) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to undertake the instant construction after completion of the completion inspection on the instant extension work. (c) From March 7, 2018 to April 20, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 71,50,000,000 to the Defendant, including the instant extension work and the value added tax on the instant construction work. D. May 10, 2018, approval for the use of the instant extension work was granted. (e) On July 2, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction as the former office of D operated by the Defendant within seven days and, if not, he/she did not perform the said construction (hereinafter “instant content certification”).

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there was no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the Plaintiff was urged by the Defendant to complete the instant construction without performing the construction work, but the Plaintiff did not perform it, and thus, cancelled it on the ground of the Defendant’s nonperformance of the instant contract due to the instant content certification.