2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 4, Eul, the defendant's spouse, is running the construction business in the name of Eul, Eul subcontracted the Gyeonggi-gu G ground construction project to Eul, and Eul subcontracted the construction project to the plaintiff during the construction project, which was not paid part of the subcontract price, and the plaintiff was not paid part of the subcontract price, and on the other hand, the letter of promise of payment for completed portion was prepared on March 28, 2016 (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter the same shall apply), stating that "F is not paid the subcontract price to the plaintiff, it shall be paid directly to the plaintiff." The letter of promise of payment for completed portion as of March 28, 2016 (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter the same shall apply), and at the end, D's name is written, and the seal is affixed to D's name

Plaintiff’s assertion

Since the defendant ordered the actual operator of E to prepare the letter of undertaking of this case, the defendant is obligated to pay 37 million won and damages for delay payable to the plaintiff.

Judgment

In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 6-1, 5, and 1, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D on October 18, 2017 against D on the basis of the instant letter of commitment (Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017Gadan23407), and the appellate court stated that D and the defendant stated that "D have not entered or affixed their names or affixed their seals on their own," and accordingly, on September 12, 2018, "the authenticity of the instant letter of commitment cannot be recognized" (the court ruling 2018Na624), and that the plaintiff's appeal against this case was rejected on December 28, 2018 on the ground that the appellate court rendered a ruling of dismissal of the complaint on September 12, 2018 (the court 2018Na624), and that the plaintiff's appeal against this case was rejected on the ground that the plaintiff's act of forgery was conducted under trial on December 28, 2018.