A. On February 9, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with Defendant A (mutual name): (a) with respect to landscaping construction works among the construction works of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the Gu and the construction period from February 10, 2017 to September 30, 2017.

B. In addition, the Plaintiff increased the construction cost to KRW 163,900,000 for additional work on September 10, 2017, while carrying out landscaping construction work in accordance with the said contract, and completed the construction work on October 16, 2017, but did not receive the construction cost up to now.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 6, the purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion;

A. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the said construction cost as joint business operators of D.

B. Defendant B, C, and C respectively acquire 10% of the shares on December 19, 2017 through January 1, 2018, after the completion of landscaping construction works, Defendant B and C respectively, and they claim that Defendant A do not have a duty to pay the said construction price jointly and severally with Defendant A.

3. Determination

A. Judgment on deemed confession as to the part of claim against Defendant A (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. In addition to the contents of the claims against Defendant B and C with the overall purport of the pleadings, Defendant B and C can be seen as participating in the joint business only when the Plaintiff had been delayed due to the completion of landscaping construction work, and the statement of evidence Nos. 6 alone is insufficient to deem that at the time, Defendant B and C entered into a joint business relationship with Defendant B and C with the meaning of jointly liable for all obligations related to landscaping construction incurred prior to their participation in the joint business place, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the different premise is rejected.

4. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A is justified, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B and C is groundless.