Among the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the order shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 2015, the Plaintiff received a contract from the Defendant to construct a new house of 9.82 square meters (hereinafter “instant house”) including retaining wall construction on the ground of Jung-Eup, Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant house”).

(hereinafter “instant construction work.” The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 130,000,000 for the instant construction work, and the Defendant agreed to pay the remainder KRW 70,000 as the down payment, and the remainder KRW 60,00,000 for the Plaintiff’s housing loan after completion of construction.

B. After commencing the instant construction, the Plaintiff completed the retaining wall construction, and constructed the foundation of the instant housing with reinforced concrete, the Plaintiff suspended the construction as it did not pay the down payment of KRW 70,000,000 as promised by the Defendant while the wall part was constructed with light-weight steel instead of reinforced concrete.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. After awarding the instant construction contract to the Plaintiff, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to change the design from the reinforced concrete structure to the yellow soil house. Accordingly, the Plaintiff continued to perform the sloping construction work for the basic retaining wall construction and the sloping soil house construction, but the said construction was suspended due to the conflict with the Defendant. However, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 44,616,00 for the construction cost.

B. Since the Defendant requested the construction of the YE to change the contract, the Plaintiff did not have any duty to perform the construction of the saves structure with the saves structure. However, the Defendant cancelled the instant construction contract due to the Plaintiff’s nonperformance, and thus the Defendant is not obligated to pay the construction cost, and even if the termination of contract is not recognized, the saves construction part other than the basic construction work is not constructed.