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

A. The Defendant is the owner of a new construction project in Chungcheongnam-gun C and D, Chungcheongnam-gun, and D.

Around September 25, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with E for the above construction work. On March 6, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with E for the part of the above construction work.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”). The instant contract is indicated as the ordering place by E and the Plaintiff as the contractor, and the main contents of the instant contract are as follows.

1. Name of the Corporation: The Corporation for the Construction of Urban-type Residential Housing in Geumsan (the National Housing Corporation);

2. Date of commencement: The construction amount on March 6, 2015: 325 million won (excluding surtax) - the special engineer - the special engineer - the G sale contract in progress to A, which is submitted for the purpose of security, and the construction cost shall be paid immediately after completion of the contract, and where a promise is made, two households shall be transferred in the name of each person.

B. Around March 11, 2015, the Plaintiff commenced the above interior works and completed the construction work on or around July 30, 2015, but did not receive the construction payment from E.

C. The Plaintiff holds a sales contract for Hho Lake and I (hereinafter “each of the instant houses”) among the said houses.

The seller's name in the above sales contract is printed in the same letter, and the defendant's seal is affixed thereto.

On the other hand, in the end of the contract for sale in lots printed with the same text, the buyer affixed the Defendant’s seal on the side of the contract for payment in kind, stating that “this contract is a contract for payment in kind (in-house interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior)” on April 1015.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including a serial number), and Eul's assertion as to the parties mentioned in the evidence No. 1

A. The Defendant, around April 10, 2015, constitutes a payment for the construction price under the instant contract, which was directly borne by the Defendant to the Plaintiff.