A. On July 15, 2014, the Plaintiff subcontracted the construction cost of stone construction works among the new construction works in Pyeongtaek-si Cown, the Defendant was running from the Defendant, and completed the said construction works around October 2014, and the construction cost of KRW 3.9 million was incurred separately due to the additional construction works.

B. On July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff received a transfer from the Defendant of KRW 15 million out of the advance payment.

(Really, it was transferred from D's account that appears to have been the spouse of the defendant).

Around 2014, the defendant prepared a written confirmation (Evidence A2) stating that the above construction cost was KRW 45 million to the plaintiff, and that KRW 15 million was paid among them, and that additional KRW 3.9 million was required due to new construction works (Evidence A2).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is a contractor who entered into a contract with the Plaintiff or a person who has expressed his/her intent to bear the obligation by preparing the above confirmation document, and is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 34.4 million (i.e., the total construction cost of KRW 45.5 million - the fixed construction cost of KRW 3.9 million - the fixed construction cost of KRW 15 million) and damages for delay.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that it is unreasonable to claim the full amount of construction cost to the Defendant merely because the Defendant and E were engaged in a partnership with each other, but the Defendant’s representative prepared a confirmation document or contract, etc. to the Plaintiff.

However, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant expressed to the Plaintiff the intent to repay the full amount of the obligation by preparing and granting a written contract or written confirmation thereof, as well as jointly and severally liable by several persons (see Article 57(1) of the Commercial Act) where the obligation is assumed due to commercial activities under the Commercial Act.

In addition, the defendant asserts.