(a) As regards Defendant B’s limited liability company’s KRW 34,957,780 and KRW 12,936,660 among them, the Defendant limited liability company’s KRW 34,957,780 from May 1, 2018 to KRW 22.

A. (1) On November 8, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a sand line contract (hereinafter “Defendant B”) with Defendant Limited Liability Company B (hereinafter “Defendant B”).

(2) The Defendant B, the father of the representative D, agreed to receive the cost of sand screening work with a unit price of KRW 3,400 per square meter. The Defendant B, the father of the representative D, entered into the said contract as his agent.

The Plaintiff agreed to issue a tax invoice in the name of the Defendants at the request of E, and pay the amount to the Defendants accordingly.

3) Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”)

(A) As the father of F’s representative F, the Defendants were practically managed as the father of F. (2018). The Plaintiff was a person who is supplied with the monthly (including value-added tax, 31,838,620 31,838,620 (Evidence 3-3-12,936,660 = 6,832,980 = 6,832,980 = 632,980 6,980 6,632,980 6,980 6,6326, 6326, 103, 680 (Evidence 3-2, Defendant B4 April 1, 6326, 103, 680, 185 11, 911,900

However, the sum of working expenses in 2578 is 22,021,120 won.

May 255 953,70 July 2261 8,456,140 69,380

(b) The fact that the current status of production in the G site [based] has no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 6 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply], and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. Defendant B’s claim against Defendant B with respect to KRW 34,957,780 in total working expenses from February 1, 2018 to August 2018 and KRW 12,936,660 in total working expenses from March 4, 2018 following the date following the issuance of a tax invoice for KRW 22,021,120 in the work expenses from May 1, 2018; and KRW 22,021,120 in the work expenses from February 8, 2018, which is the day following the date the final output is calculated; thus, Defendant B’s claim against the Plaintiff against the Defendant B was entirely modified according to the Plaintiff’s assertion and certification. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against this part of this claim’s claim is with merit.