A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the manufacture and sales of ready-mixed, and the Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company engaged in civil and construction work business, etc., and the Defendant B is the representative director of the Defendant Company.

B. On January 28, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that, in entering into the instant supply contract under Defendant B’s joint and several sureties, the Defendant B did not have any joint and several sureties with respect to the Defendant Company’s obligations for the payment of ready-mixed containers. However, it can be recognized that D, the head of the Defendant Company’s site manager, obtained the power of attorney on the joint and several sureties from Defendant B and concluded the contract on behalf

Around February 5, 2015 through June 8, 2016, the Defendant Company entered into a contract to supply ready-mixeds at the construction site of Gwangju Mine-gu (hereinafter “instant supply contract”), and supplied ready-mixeds equivalent to KRW 1,425,922,190 in total with the Defendant Company.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff received KRW 1,274,187,340 in total from the Defendant Company over the period from December 15, 2015 to March 31, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1 to 3, 8, 9 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the allegations and the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining amount of KRW 151,734,850 (i.e., KRW 1,425,922,190, KRW 1,274,187,340) and the following day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint in this case, and Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 6, 2017 to the day of full payment.

The defendant company asserted that the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's claim because it supplied ready-mixeds below cement content at the construction site of this case, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

3. If so, the plaintiff .