The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized by the purport of Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 3, and all of the statements and arguments, and each statement of Eul evidence 1 to 7 (including paper numbers) is insufficient to reverse the recognition.

On August 31, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Defendant for the construction work of the second-class housing building C (hereinafter “instant construction work”) with the construction cost of KRW 159,900,000, and the construction period of KRW 159,90,000 from September 1, 2016 to December 31, 201 of the same year.

B. The Plaintiff, while continuing the instant construction, suspended the construction in the state of the early completion of the construction project on February 2017, and transferred the said construction site to the Defendant. Afterward, the Defendant directly proceeded with the remaining construction and completed the said building on May 18, 2018.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. At the time of suspending the instant construction work, the Plaintiff’s assertion had already completed the construction work equivalent to 90% of the total construction cost (i.e., KRW 2.5 million additional construction cost (i., KRW 2.5 million additional construction cost, KRW 1.5 million) at the Defendant’s request. However, the Plaintiff received only KRW 1.1 million out of the construction cost as above from the Defendant and did not receive the remainder of construction cost.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the agreed construction cost of KRW 143,910,00 (i.e., KRW 159,90,000 x 90%) and the remaining construction cost of KRW 149,910,000, which is the sum of KRW 6,000 for additional construction cost of KRW 149,910,000, which is the sum of KRW 1100,000,000 for additional construction cost (=149,910,000 - KRW 101,000,000), and the delay damages therefrom.

B. According to the above facts as to the claim for the payment of the construction cost of the construction project, the contract for the construction project of this case is suspended by the Plaintiff and delivered the construction site to the Defendant on February 2017.