However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

[Case] The Defendant, around January 25, 2014, entered into a contract with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) for new construction of multi-household housing in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (the construction cost of KRW 565,00,000) with the owner of the building.

D around May 15, 2014, the portion of the tin construction among the above new construction works was awarded to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) a subcontract (57,000,000 won of the construction cost).

The F’s director G did not pay the construction completion price in D on July 2014, 201, while suspending the construction work, demanded the owner to guarantee the payment of the construction cost. Accordingly, on July 2014, Haman D’s director D’s office located in Gangnam-gu I, Seoul to request that the subcontractor be responsible for the payment of the construction cost. The subcontractor’s direct payment of the construction cost (the form where the owner pays the construction completion price directly to the subcontractor, not D), and the subcontractor and the beneficiary (D) agreed to accept the completion of the construction for the purpose of completing the construction project.

According to such a consultation, H stated the phrase “A”, “A”, “J”, “G”, and “K”, the Defendant’s name, resident registration number, address, and telephone number, which are the Defendant’s name, in the official space of each of the above building owners, as stated by H, at the bottom of the right side of the standard subcontract agreement for construction works, which was prepared between D and F, at the above date, at the above time and place.

Since then, F has completed the tin work, but the Corporation failed to receive any balance from D, the claim for the construction cost against D.