1. The Defendant’s KRW 443,247,830 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from March 20, 2015 to May 25, 2017.

1. Facts of premise;

1. Construction name: Crelet construction works;

2. Site location: Ulsan Metropolitan City, Dong-gu, and one parcel other than B.

3. Period: January 31, 2014, the completion date of construction, September 23, 2013.

4. Contract amount: Value-added tax in the amount of one hundred million won or more: Separate.

6. Timing of completed portion and method: A balance of the construction work shall be paid within 15 days after the completion of the construction work at the time of completion of the construction work of 150,000,000 Won for a steel framed at the time of the completion of the construction work of 150,000,000 Won for concrete of the second floor floor.

9. The rate of penalty for delay: 1/1000.

A. The Plaintiff is a constructor registered as a construction business under Article 9 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry. Around September 10, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted a construction work standard contract from the Defendant for a construction project with the content of being awarded a contract for the construction project for the building project on a lot outside Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-gu, and one parcel of land, and the main contents

(2) As above, the construction of the newly constructed building "B," "B," and "the construction of the building of this case" (hereinafter "the construction contract of this case").

The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 205,00,000,000 as the instant construction cost, on May 20, 2014, and KRW 205,00,000, in total, on November 20, 2014.

C. On March 4, 2015, the Defendant obtained approval for the use of the instant loan from the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 4, 5, Eul evidence 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. As to the claim for construction cost on the ground that the plaintiff of the contract for construction work in this case entered into with the defendant and completed the construction work, the defendant concluded an agreement with the plaintiff on the land owned by the defendant to set up Gap evidence No. 1 (Standard Contract for Construction Work) and set up it necessary for the loan of construction cost, and actually did not conclude the contract for construction work in this case.