2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

On November 17, 2015, the Plaintiff paid 6,289,000 won to Nonparty C (D) on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the head of the site management office at the site of “Seoul-gun, Jindo-gun Public Sewerage Maintenance Work (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction work”) executed by the Defendant from May 21, 2015 to January 21, 2016, when serving as the site management office at the site of “Seoul-gun, Jindo-do Public Sewerage Maintenance Work” (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction work”). There is no dispute between the parties, or it is recognized in full view of the purport of each of the arguments stated in subparagraphs 1 through 4.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 6,289,00 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from November 18, 2015 to May 12, 2016, which is served on the Defendant by the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant should deduct the above amount of damages from the amount that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff, since the defendant caused damages equivalent to the above amount of damages by claiming the defendant's labor costs of the non-party E and F who did not actually provide labor to the defendant while working as the head of the site management office at the construction site of this case, and by requiring the defendant to pay the above amount of 13,056,470 won, including the above amount of KRW 8,77,80,670 and the above amount of KRW 4,278,670, etc.

Next, the defendant, under the trade name of "G" around October 2015, requested "H General Development Project" from the non-party 1, employed and work for the non-party 1,50,000 won of the above I wage and the equipment cost of the above I to the above FFF Construction Corporation, and received payment for the above period, although the above I requested the above I to work at the construction site of this case and used equipment such as the above FFF Construction Corporation, the plaintiff received the above I wage and the equipment cost of the above FF, and eventually received the above I wage from the defendant. The defendant asserted that the above I would have to deduct the above unjust enrichment from the amount to be paid by the plaintiff, and that the division of the plaintiff did not claim for the above FFF from the non-party 1 for the above construction site for the period of 0,000 won and 4,050,000 won of the equipment cost of the above FFG construction without any dispute between the plaintiff and the non-party 4, who claimed that the above FFF construction project was actually contracted.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim shall be accepted with due reason.