1. The Defendant’s KRW 538,066,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 25, 2013 to October 29, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is an executor of the construction of the instant construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) of Pyeongtaek-si and three lots of ground neighborhood living facilities and the condominium buildings (hereinafter “instant building”) outside of Pyeongtaek-si, and Nonparty Dong-si Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Dong Dong-si”) is the contractor of the said construction.

B. On March 22, 2010, the Plaintiff concluded a subcontract construction contract with the purport that it would be awarded a contract for the construction of the instant construction project and the construction of the instant sub-contractors (hereinafter “instant subcontracted project”). The main contents are as follows.

1. Project owner: The name of Defendant prime contract: New Construction Corporation C;

2. The name of subcontracted works: Artistic and waterproof works;

3. The construction site: Pyeongtaek-si and three parcels outside Pyeongtaek-si; and

4. Period of construction: On June 30, 2010, the contract amount: 693,000,000 won: Value-added tax of 630,000,000 won: the fact that there is no dispute over KRW 63,00,000 [founded grounds], each entry in the evidence of subparagraphs A (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings;

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant subcontract construction contract was entered into between Dong Yong-si and Dong Yong-si, and Dong Yong-si was registered on July 2010, and the reason for direct payment under Article 14(1)1 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract Act”) occurred since it constitutes a case where the payment of subcontract price is not possible due to payment suspension or other reasons, and the Plaintiff demanded direct payment of subcontract price by the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint. The Defendant, as the owner of the instant construction, is obligated to directly pay KRW 535,584,00,00 for the instant subcontract price under the Subcontract Act.

In addition, around July 2013, the Plaintiff was ordered by the Defendant to perform the waterproof Construction Work on the instant building. Thus, the Plaintiff was doing so.