1. The Defendant’s KRW 57,505,40 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from October 24, 2015 to October 20, 2016.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the statements set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6 (including paper numbers), witness A, and witness Eul's testimony.

A around June 2015, the Defendant, who runs a construction business, etc., awarded a contract with A (C) to the Plaintiff who runs an indoor construction business, etc. for the construction cost of KRW 68 million among D remodeling works (hereinafter “instant first works”).

B. The Plaintiff mobilized directly workers, etc. and performed the instant construction work from June 5, 2015 to July 9, 2015.

(However, construction equipment, such as forkin vehicles and ridges, were provided by the Defendant). Among them, A directly demanded the Plaintiff to perform additional construction works, such as modification of design, and re-building of walls, etc. (hereinafter “instant additional construction”) due to the relationship in which the Defendant employee did not reside at the construction site, and the construction cost accordingly was subsequently settled according to the volume of the construction work.

C. Upon completion of all of the instant construction works, A agreed to settle and pay the Plaintiff’s construction cost incurred from additional construction works with the Defendant, and to settle the instant construction cost as KRW 130 million in total with the initial construction and additional construction costs.

[Defendant denies the agreement on the payment of the additional construction cost to the Plaintiff, but without such agreement, there is no reason for A to pay the amount higher than the initial construction cost to the Defendant, as well as directly present himself in this court and give testimony to the same purport. The Defendant assumed that the claim for the return of unjust enrichment is established in relation to the Defendant by failing to pay the additional construction cost to the Plaintiff, and that the aforementioned claim for the return of unjust enrichment is transferred to the Plaintiff (in light of the evidence No. 9 and No. 10 of the above provision, at