A. On February 6, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontract”) with respect to the painting construction work among the construction works for Pyeongtaek-si D ground buildings contracted by the Defendant (hereinafter “C”) from February 6, 2018 to March 15, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction work”).

B. After that, the Plaintiff and the Defendant increased the contract amount of the instant subcontract to KRW 153,200,000 on March 14, 2018.

C. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction within the agreed construction period, and received KRW 55,000,000 from the Defendant as the construction price.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the subcontract construction cost of KRW 98,200,000 (=153,200,000 - 55,000,000) and damages for delay.

On April 25, 2018, the Defendant issued a written consent to the direct payment of the subcontract price to the Plaintiff on April 25, 2018, and accordingly, C bears the responsibility for the payment of the remaining subcontract price to the Plaintiff under Article 35 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, and the Defendant has no obligation

According to the evidence No. 1, the fact that the Defendant, on April 25, 2018, prepared a “written consent for direct payment of subcontract price” with the purport that “the Plaintiff, a subcontractor, agrees to pay the subcontractor the price for the remaining portion of the supply and demand of the painting construction work,” but the fact of recognition alone is either between the ordering person and the contractor that directly pays the subcontractor the subcontract price.