Bridge legend

I enjoyed it. A strictly Lithuanian family (that's how the sky burned). 🙂 It is clear that one should not pay for the fence, since it was not built. The fact that he will leave the fence (because now there is peace) is just a matter of fact that does not require payment. But perhaps one should pay him for the bridge from the descending law, since now he will be blessed with a bridge. We must discuss whether this is going to be bridged or not, and whether to pay him bridge fees or as an idle laborer/keeper of the Kishoin and the like. It is still necessary to discuss whether the worker was in the right. After all, he received money to build a fence and did not do it. Ostensibly, no. It is true that he would later be pleased with the messenger for what he did, and it is necessary to discuss whether this makes his action worthy of retroactive compensation. If in the end he was not pleased with her, then it is clear that the worker exceeded his mission and violated the contract. It is necessary to discuss the law of a worker who returns in half a day, and so on.