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

A. Defendant B is the owner of multi-household housing (multi-household housing) with the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 179.2m2m2m2, and Defendant C is the husband of Defendant B, and the Plaintiff completed the structural construction among the new construction works of multi-household housing (multi-household housing) (hereinafter referred to as the “new construction works of this case”), and the structural construction of the structural construction (hereinafter referred to as the “instant structural construction”).

B. On May 10, 2014, Defendant B entered into a contract for the instant new construction works with E Co., Ltd. and the instant new construction works on or before the scheduled date of completion of the completion of the project on September 30, 2014 and the contract amount of KRW 49.38 million (including value-added tax). On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction of F, the vice president of the instant E Co., Ltd, and the instant framework works, with the construction period of KRW 132,40,00 (including value-added tax) from June 10, 2014 to August 31, 2014; and F paid advance 22 million to the Plaintiff around that time.

C. Meanwhile, on July 8, 2014, the Plaintiff and F paid the remainder of the payment method of the construction cost, excluding the amount of KRW 22,00,000,000 already paid as advance payment, to the payment method of the construction cost of the instant aggregate construction work, the first period construction cost was modified to the content of the existing construction contract, and the second period construction cost was KRW 30,000,000 after the outer wall is closed, and the third period construction cost was paid KRW 20,000,000 after the interior finish, and the third period construction cost was paid KRW 10,000,000,000 after the finishing construction (However, it does not include the said amount) (hereinafter “former payment agreement”).

After that, the Plaintiff received the payment of KRW 90 million for completed portion and KRW 19.8 million from Defendant B, among the total sum of KRW 10.130,000,000,000 and KRW 15,000,000 from Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion is 6.0% of the unpaid construction cost for the following reasons.