Construction company halts work despite overpayment

Fraud is as follows:
After pouring the EG ceiling, work was supposed to continue in the 2nd calendar week of 2019. This was also agreed upon in another meeting on 17.12.2018, in which our construction consultant also participated. We would reduce the last invoice of €47,500 by €7,500 and withhold this amount until the defects were clarified and remedied. The payment of €40,000 was tied to the continuation of construction in KW 2. However, Mr. xxx apparently no longer intended to continue building at that time. After we transferred the €40,000, we immediately received a notice of hindrance stating that continuation of work was not possible due to low temperatures. The letter was dated 17.12.18, the date of the meeting in the afternoon. Our construction consultant rejected the notice of hindrance in writing, with the reasoning that we did not have subzero temperatures.
Furthermore, the work was neither resumed in the 2nd calendar week nor later. Instead, the construction site was completely cleared by mid-January.

A prerequisite for fraud is initially a deceptive act by the perpetrator. This is understood as the intellectual influence on the perception of another, e.g., by feigning, conclusive behavior, or omission of clarification. Through the deceptive act, an error must be caused or maintained in the other person. Due to the error, a disposition of assets must take place.

If you are economically capable, then use the legal route. Perseverance is the motto. If you want justice, [Inkasso Moskau] is more helpful. The money is gone anyway. Sorry to say so. A general mistake here is overpayment. One waives their rights under the [Baugesetzbuch]. I just don't understand it, the warning even airs on [Trash TV].

Debt collection Moscow is a good idea. Does anyone have contact details?

Google, but they also act within the legal framework and only hope for reactions from the debtors through their "appearance". Save your money.

Already found. Thanks. But I have another idea.

The payment of the €40,000 was tied to the continuation of construction in week 2.

No, the payment was due because the ground floor ceiling was completed. You signed that.
Of course he won’t continue building if you don’t pay. That is probably even stated in the contract. There is definitely no intent to deceive or even fraud here – at least as far as the payment is concerned.

A prerequisite for fraud is initially a deceptive act by the perpetrator.
[..]
Due to the error, a disposition of assets must take place.

The payment is not a mistake and there was no disposition of assets either, since you paid according to the contract. You were obliged to do so!

I’m sorry if I am arguing here in the villain’s interest, but that’s exactly what people will do when push comes to shove.