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

A. On January 17, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) to obtain a subcontract of KRW 30,000,000 for the “Gimpo D Multi-household D D D tin Corporation.”

B. Since then, as the Plaintiff failed to receive the construction cost from C, the Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment against the claim against the Defendant by Sungwon District Court Branch 2013Kadan2690, Sungwon District Court Branch 2013Kadan2690, “C’s claim for construction cost of KRW 30,000,000 against the Defendant,” and received the decision of acceptance on July 17, 2013. The original copy of the said decision was served on the Defendant on August 8, 2013.

C. In addition, on January 28, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for a collection order for the seizure and collection order of the claim (30,000,000 won) to be transferred to the provisional seizure by Sungwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch 2014TTT 376 according to the above provisional seizure order, and the above provisional seizure (30,000,000 won) was transferred to the provisional seizure, and obtained a decision to seize the remainder of KRW 98,630 except for it, and the original copy of the above provisional seizure and collection order was served to the Defendant on February 3, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted by the parties that the plaintiff, a creditor against C, received a seizure and collection order as above and the original copy of the decision was served on the defendant, and the defendant did not pay the construction cost. Thus, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is liable to pay 30,098,630 won and delay damages in accordance with the above collection order.

(A) In addition, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant agreed to pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the above collection amount. Accordingly, the Defendant is merely a business entity subcontracted the above construction work from Seoul Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Comprehensive Construction”) that received a contract for construction from the Defendant, the owner of the building, and Seoul Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd.