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

A. On August 26, 2015, B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) awarded a contract with the Defendant on the following: (i) from September 1, 2015 to October 20, 2015; (ii) from September 1, 2015, to October 20, 2015, the construction cost of which was KRW 158 million; and (iii) from September 1, 2015 to October 20, 2015, the construction period of the typhoon damage restoration work against B was KRW 116 million; and (iv) the construction period was extended from September 1, 2015 to October 20, 2015; and (v) the construction cost was KRW 16 million.

(B) The respective works of this case in total, including the works for repairing guest rooms and the works for restoring typhoon damage. (b)

On September 1, 2015, the Defendant subcontracted each of the instant construction works to D (mutual name: E) with the construction cost of KRW 177,93 million (including value-added tax).

C. The Defendant paid D KRW 98,010,000 to D for the progress payment of each of the instant construction works, and paid KRW 25,470,000 to F workers who received a subcontract for each of the instant construction works en bloc by D.

The Plaintiff asserted that each of the instant construction works was sub-subcontracted by D, and the Defendant requested a direct payment of the subcontract price to the Defendant, and the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to submit a detailed statement of the subcontract price to the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff refused this request, the Defendant deposited KRW 55,820,000 for the remainder of each of the instant construction works on January 13, 2016, under the Suwon District Court No. 104 in Suwon District Court Decision 2016, Jan. 13, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, Eul evidence No. 1 to 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant is obligated to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff, since the construction work was completed by subcontracting the construction cost of KRW 165,101,145 with respect to each of the instant construction works from the Defendant. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract from the Defendant, and no other evidence exists to acknowledge

Therefore, the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on each of the instant construction works.