A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. shall be KRW 45,00,000 and the year from April 13, 2019 to October 15, 2019.

A. 1) The Plaintiff is a person who produces and sells stone products with the trade name of “E”. 2) Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) was awarded a contract from the Jeju City for F lighting Construction, etc., and was awarded a subcontract to the Plaintiff in the amount of KRW 80,719,000 for the construction cost around May 2016, and the Plaintiff completed the subcontracted construction work on June 6, 2016.

However, the defendant company paid only KRW 20,000,000 out of the construction cost reduced to the plaintiff 65,000,000, and the balance of the construction cost remains KRW 45,00,000.

3) On March 2017, Defendant C awarded a contract for G construction work to the Plaintiff for KRW 1,800,000 for construction cost, and the Plaintiff completed the contracted construction work on March 28, 2017. (B) Decision on deeming confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

C. Partial dismissal: The statutory interest rate of 12% per annum shall apply from the day immediately following the date of this judgment pursuant to the amended provisions on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which was amended on May 21, 2019, and the part claiming damages for delay exceeding the scope shall

2. Claim against Defendant D

A. On October 2018, Defendant D awarded a contract to the Plaintiff for the work of installing H I at the time of Jeju to KRW 2,500,000 for the construction cost, and the Plaintiff completed the said work on October 20, 2018.

Therefore, Defendant D is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above construction cost of KRW 2,500,000 and the delay damages.

B. In light of the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment Nos. 1 and 2, it is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant D ordered the above construction work to the Plaintiff by itself, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant company and the defendant C shall be accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant D shall be dismissed as it is without merit.