A. Defendant Bangladesh Incorporated Co., Ltd (former trade name before the modification: hereinafter “Defendant Bangladesh”) contracted D Corporation from the Korea Water Resources Corporation on June 21, 2013 (hereinafter “instant Corporation”).

B. On January 24, 2014, Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) supplied sewage to the soil works and reinforced concrete construction works among the instant construction works from Defendant Bangladesh.

C. On March 19, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of goods with Defendant A and the instant construction site to supply steel bars, and agreed to receive the price of goods as “the 20th day of the month following the end of the month”.

(hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”). Defendant B, the representative director of Defendant A, and Defendant C, at the time, who was the head of the site office of Defendant A at the time, jointly and severally guaranteed the goods payment obligation that Defendant A owes to the Plaintiff regarding the instant goods supply contract.

On the other hand, on September 3, 2014, the Plaintiff’s field agent E, Defendant A’s field agent F, Defendant Bangladesh’s G is written with the following written confirmation (hereinafter “instant confirmation”).

With respect to the instant construction project, the payment for the supply of steel processing between the subcontractor (Defendant A) and the steel processing company (Plaintiff) shall be made in direct payment with the ordering authority.

Provided, That prior to the introduction of the direct payment system of the ordering place, the employee of the original office shall be present at the defendant A and pay the price.

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without a dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The part of the claim against the defendant A, B, and C

A. 1) In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 2, the Plaintiff’s supply of steel bars of KRW 265,475,592 as shown in the table to defendant A on April 2014 to November 2014.

In addition, the fact that the plaintiff received 138,943,80 won out of the price of goods from the defendant A is the plaintiff.

(1) the supply month;