1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,261,603 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from November 26, 2014 to June 9, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 1, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to pay KRW 13,500,000 as a down payment on October 1, 2014, with the payment of KRW 10,50,000 as an integrated repair work cost (hereinafter “instant construction work”) with respect to a factory located in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant construction work”), on condition that the Plaintiff would be paid KRW 10,000,00 as an intermediate payment during the construction process, and the intermediate payment of KRW 7,00,000 as an intermediate payment, and KRW 13,50,000 as an remainder payment after the completion of construction work on November 15, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The Defendant paid 17,00,000 won to the Plaintiff according to the instant contract.

C. On November 1, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the completion of construction by text messages, and claimed KRW 25,00,000 under the pretext of additional construction costs, such as construction balance, waste disposal expenses, and toilets, and left the construction site of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 16,550,000 payable for the construction cost (i.e., value-added tax - KRW 33,550,000, 17,000) out of the amount payable for the construction cost. (ii) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to remove the existing toilets in addition to the instant contract on October 2, 2014, and make an oral agreement to remove the previous toilets in addition to the instant contract, and install the board construction and the internal change construction work. As such, the additional construction cost incurred in KRW 7,852,93, the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 7,852,933 of the said additional construction cost.

B. It is insufficient to acknowledge the completion by the Plaintiff of the instant construction work solely on the basis of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 22 with regard to the determination of the claim for remainder of construction work, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge

However, the purport of the whole pleadings shall be as to each entry of the evidence as referred to in subparagraphs 3 through 18.