A. On October 10, 2019, the Defendant received a contract from the owner C for the new construction of multi-household housing located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “new construction of this case”). On October 10, 2019, the Defendant subcontracted the interior construction of this case to E Co., Ltd. with the cost of construction KRW 346,00,000 (excluding value-added tax).

B. On October 28, 2019, E re-subcontracted the construction work to the Plaintiff at KRW 85,850,000 (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter “instant construction cost”).

C. The Plaintiff: (a) received down payment of KRW 17,170,000 from E on the date of the said sub-subcontracts; (b) but thereafter, did not receive the progress payment for the construction works executed thereafter, the Plaintiff suspended construction around November 28, 2019; and (c) drafted a final agreement on tin construction works (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with E on December 6, 2019, as in the attached Form E.

The plaintiff completed the above tin construction.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 19, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff did not receive the payment for the completed portion from E, and the instant agreement was prepared, presented the instant agreement, and demanded the Defendant to pay the construction cost, and the Defendant promised to pay the construction cost directly, and completed the tin Corporation around December 19, 2019.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 52,580,000, which was unpaid among the construction cost of the instant case, and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff merely agreed with the owner C to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant did not agree to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff.

C. The following facts are found either to be in dispute between the above facts and the parties, or to be recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 7 through 12, 17, 18, 20, and 21: