2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

A. On May 2016, 2016, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract by the Defendant, a representative director, from the Defendant Company C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), for the warehouse and second floor extension work among the Rotterdam Corporation in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with the construction cost of KRW 30,00,000, and the completion date of construction within 50 days from the commencement date of construction.

(hereinafter “instant extension work”). The Plaintiff completed the construction work on June 2016, and was paid KRW 21,000,000 out of the construction cost on May 4, 2016 to July 4, 2016.

B. On June 2016, the Plaintiff received a contract from Nonparty Company for construction works for the construction of the Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu Ground Living Facilities at KRW 239,80,000 for the construction cost, and the construction period from June 28, 2016 to October 30, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as the “new construction of this case.” The contract contains the name of G company instead of the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the “new construction”).

The construction of this case was delayed more than scheduled construction due to the problems of boundary surveying, etc., and on November 3, 2016, the construction was delayed due to the design change, etc., such as the change of the number of floors from the second floor on the ground to the third floor on the ground, and on May 25, 2017, there was approval for the use of new buildings.

The instant New Construction Corporation has increased the construction cost to KRW 267,50,000 due to the modification of a design, and the Plaintiff was paid KRW 251,220,000 in total as the construction cost on June 30, 2016 to May 31, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-6, 9, 12, 13 evidence, Eul 1 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff alleged that the construction cost of this case was KRW 9,00,000 among the construction cost of this case and KRW 35,300,000 among the construction cost of the new construction of this case and KRW 8,544,540 among the construction cost of this case, were not paid.

(A) The construction contract is concluded in the name of the non-party company, other than the defendant, and is thus concluded in the name of the non-party company, in order to have the Plaintiff construct the new building and not pay the construction cost even if the ownership of the new building was acquired.