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

A. On October 1, 2018, the Defendant received contracts from C (hereinafter referred to as “C”) for construction work price of KRW 1,940,400,00 (20% of the contract price, the intermediate payment of KRW 40,000 within 7 days after the conclusion of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 40,000 within 20 days after the commencement of the construction, and the remainder of 40,00 days after the completion of the construction) from C (hereinafter referred to as “C”) and the construction period from October 1, 2018 to November 9, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

In addition, the defendant, around October 1, 2018, stated the certificate Nos. 2 and 3 of E, Inc. 2 and 3 as "E," but the Do Governor is "Co. E," and the tax invoice Nos. 4 as a supplier, as the defendant issued the certificate No. 2 and 3 as a supplier, it appears that the entry of the certificate Nos. 2 and 3 is erroneous.

(hereinafter “E”) subcontracted the instant construction work in KRW 1,760,000,00 for the construction cost.

(Construction Period and Terms and Conditions of Payment are the same as the instant subcontract; hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontract”).

E commenced the instant construction work at the time of the conclusion of the instant subcontract, and pursuant to the instant subcontract, the Defendant paid E KRW 352,000,000,000 each of the intermediate payment of KRW 704,00,000 (=1,760,000,000) around October 1, 2018, and around February 1, 2019 (=1,760,000,000 x 0.4) among the intermediate payment of KRW 352,00,000, respectively.

Based on the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Daejeon District Court Decision 2019Gadan12226, the Plaintiff issued a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) on February 18, 2020, on the basis of the executory exemplification of the judgment in the wage case No. 2019Gadan1226, the Plaintiff issued a seizure and collection order on KRW 94,147,126, out of the claim for the construction price of the instant construction against the Defendant under the Seoul Western District Court 2020 Tagae1801 (excluding the claim for prohibition of seizure of wages prescribed in Article 88 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry). The instant collection order was served on the Defendant on February 21, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 8, as a whole, and all pleadings.