A. Around May 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a repair work agreement with the Defendant for the repair work that stipulated “A (a subordinate ship, gross tonnage: 1,729 tons of construction cost)” as “from May 27, 2016 to June 23, 2016,” and completed repair of the said vessel on or around June 30, 2016.

B. The Defendant remitted to the Plaintiff KRW 10,00,000 on June 3, 2016, ② KRW 10,000,000 on June 24, 2016, ③ KRW 10,000 on July 10, 2016, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

C. On the other hand, on July 7, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a written statement of direct payment requesting Nonparty Seoyang Shipping Co., Ltd. to pay KRW 27,000,000 out of the above repair work cost to Nonparty Seoyang Shipping Co., Ltd.

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

2. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total repair work cost of KRW 110,000,000,000 and the total amount of KRW 57,000,000, which the plaintiff is the plaintiff and the total amount of KRW 27,000,000, which the plaintiff is the plaintiff and the total of KRW 57,000,000 (=110,000-57,000-57,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 24, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the non-party D, who is the defendant's representative, disbursed a total of KRW 17,860,000 on the above repair site as a construction section and the purchase price for extension, etc., and paid the full amount of the repair work cost to the plaintiff by directly paying the food expenses of the field employees. However, each of the items of the evidence Nos. 3 and 4 is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the above argument by

3. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.