1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,00,000 as well as 6% per annum from June 27, 2015 to January 21, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as indicated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the defendant around 2015 entered into an agreement with Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D to operate a closed-end bar, and around that time, the construction amount was agreed with the plaintiff as KRW 140 million (including value-added tax) and ordered the above lag construction to the plaintiff on June 26, 2015. The plaintiff completed the above lag construction on June 26, 2015. The plaintiff received KRW 98 million from the defendant and received the remainder of KRW 42 million (= KRW 140 million – KRW 98 million) from the defendant on April 19, 2017.

It can be recognized that a plan for redemption of bonds has been prepared.

B. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 42 million and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum as prescribed by the Commercial Act from June 27, 2015 to January 21, 2019, the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order, from June 27, 2015, and 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant continued to run a business with C and a dead-end store, which is the first place in 2015.

The Defendant asked the Plaintiff, who introduced the Plaintiff that was close to C as he was living together, to estimate the said interior works, and the Plaintiff was able to complete the said interior works in KRW 100 million without additional construction costs.

However, at the time of the completion of the above interior work, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the occurrence of the additional construction cost of KRW 40 million without the Defendant’s prior consent or any consultation, and delayed the completion of the work without the Defendant’s approval, and C had pressured the Defendant to reverse the partnership work with the delay of construction.

Therefore, the defendant can be forced to do so.