A. On February 12, 2014, Plaintiff A’s limited partnership company (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) received “Dwork” (hereinafter “Dwork”) from Pyeongtaek-gun for construction cost of KRW 229,096,153.

Plaintiff

On April 17, 2014, the Company did not make any separate reference to the value-added tax on the contract between the Plaintiff Company and the Defendant on April 17, 2014, for the portion of the work cost of KRW 55,00,000 for the instant Eunpyeong Construction.

subcontracted to the Corporation.

Plaintiff

On July 9, 2015, the Company entered into a contract on the instant change of construction work with Pyeongtaek-gun. Under the modified contract, the construction cost of the instant Pyeongtaek-gun was reduced from KRW 229,096,153 to KRW 222,562,153,00, and KRW 6,534,153,00, among the construction cost, labor cost was reduced from KRW 107,196,105 to KRW 104,180,234,000.

B. On July 12, 2014, the Plaintiff Company received supply of “E (4052)” (hereinafter “E”) from the Armed Forces Administration Division of the Armed Forces (UFA) for construction cost of KRW 167,815,600.

Plaintiff

On July 2, 2014, the Company subcontracted to the Defendant the labor portion of the instant prime contractor’s construction cost of KRW 50,000,000 (excluding value-added tax).

Plaintiff

On November 12, 2015, the company entered into a contract on the change of the design with the Chief Contracting Officer of the National Armed Forces. Under the modified contract, the construction cost of the instant prime contractor was reduced from KRW 167,815,60 to KRW 155,242,140 to KRW 12,573,460, and the construction cost of the instant prime contractor was reduced from KRW 66,79,263 to KRW 52,620,481 to KRW 14,178,782.

C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs regarding the payment of the subcontract price for the portion of the instant Pyeongtaek Construction Work as a result of the instant Pyeongtaek Construction Work, as the Seoul District Court’s original Branch Decision 2015 Ghana 11628.

On December 14, 2015, the above court held that the defendant jointly and severally filed a complaint of KRW 9,780,000 against the plaintiff.