1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Around October 2012, the Plaintiff, who is engaged in tidal, aesthetic, waterproof, and sunlighting construction business, entered into a subcontract with the Ulsan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Sulra Construction”), with respect to cooking construction, etc. among the new construction works of Seocho-gu Seoul Western apartment, and ② around February 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with respect to cooking construction, etc. among the new construction works of Seocho-gu Seoul Western apartment.

B. The Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant A on a construction management entrustment agreement with regard to the part of each of the above construction subcontracted from Ulsan Construction, where the actual cost of the other construction project falls short of the agreed construction execution management amount (which shall be determined by mutual agreement based on the details of the original contractor’s construction work), the Plaintiff agreed to pay the difference to Defendant A as a performance-based bonus for management remuneration, and where the actual cost of the construction exceeds the agreed execution management amount, the Defendant A paid the excess amount to the Plaintiff.

C. However, with respect to the Plaintiff, Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2013 Ma29, Feb. 21, 2013, the decision to commence rehabilitation plan was rendered on February 12, 2014, and the decision to discontinue rehabilitation procedures was rendered on February 12, 2014, and the Plaintiff and Ulsan Construction, upon the Plaintiff’s application, directly paid the wages related to the said works to the Plaintiff and the amount deducted the said amount from the Plaintiff’s claim for construction payment for the Ulsan Construction from the Plaintiff’s claim for construction payment, the Plaintiff’s administrator D, with the permission of the rehabilitation court, ordered the Plaintiff to pay the wages to the said other construction workers directly.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute does not exist, Gap evidence 1 through 7, 12 through 38, Eul evidence 1, 5 through 7 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the claim for damages equivalent to the labor cost paid in excess of the Plaintiff’s damages is the cause of this part of the claim, and the Defendant A, despite entering into a total subcontract for each of the foregoing works with the Plaintiff, intended to avoid the additional labor cost to the Plaintiff