1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be acknowledged as either a dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in the evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings.

On December 30, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction of B neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction project”) with the amount of KRW 1,950,00,000 on October 4, 2016 as of the date of commencement of the construction project on October 30, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”).

B. Around May 2016, the Defendant sent the Plaintiff a notice of cancellation of the instant contract. This notice reached the Plaintiff around that time, and the Plaintiff also expressed its intent to cancel the instant contract against the Defendant.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) Although the Plaintiff’s Defendant received a loan for the instant construction project and paid the construction cost, the Plaintiff’s instant contract was cancelled by delay due to the Defendant’s lending of the loan. or upon the Defendant’s declaration of intent of rescission around May 2016, the Defendant expressed his intent to refuse performance of the instant contract, and the Plaintiff rescinded the instant contract against the Defendant. Since the instant contract was rescinded due to the Defendant’s delay of performance or non-performance, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the expenses of KRW 38,350,000 that the Plaintiff paid for the instant construction project. (2) Since the Defendant agreed to arrange for a loan for the instant construction project, the construction cost was not raised due to the Defendant’s failure to perform the said contract, and the Defendant’s refusal of performance or non-performance of the said contract was revoked, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the special terms of the contract of this case, which can be known in full view of the statement No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and witness C’s testimony, i.e., the construction period of 13.