1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 4,635,550,000.

1. In fact, the Defendant contracted C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co.”) with “new construction of D living accommodation facilities at Jeju-si.”

C subcontracted tin construction to the Plaintiff on May 8, 2018, and the Plaintiff completed tin construction on December 15, 2018.

After December 26, 2018, the price of tin work was finally determined as KRW 609,223,450 according to the change contract between C and the plaintiff according to the results of the settlement of volume.

On the other hand, on September 15, 2018, the Defendant prepared a written confirmation to the Plaintiff that “65,000,000 won that the Plaintiff would receive from the remainder of the construction work shall be confirmed to be paid by the Defendant in the event that C is unable to pay after completion of the construction work.”

The price of stone construction that the plaintiff had not received until now is 42,032,450 won.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s tin construction works are defective due to defective construction as follows, and after the removal of the part of the cost of repair to repair the defects, it is assessed that total of KRW 46,68,000 for repair costs of KRW 46,68,00 for repair costs of KRW 3,541,000 for reconstruction costs of KRW 3,384,00 for emulitative color coloring phenomena of KRW 3,384,00 for emulitative coloring phenomena of KRW 3,384,00 for emulitic coloring phenomena of KRW 6,48,00 for emulitic luminous treatment costs of KRW 519,60 for emulitic luminous treatment costs of KRW 46,68,00 for emulitic emuliting treatment costs.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the result of the request for appraisal of defects to appraiser E by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition of the cause of the principal claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of 42,032,450 won to the Plaintiff according to the direct payment agreement on September 15, 2018, except in extenuating circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion (the grounds for a defense and a counterclaim as to the main claim)

A. The Defendant asserts that he denies the direct payment obligation under the letter of confirmation, and the letter of confirmation dated September 15, 2018 will meet the date of the occupancy of the buyer in the event that the Plaintiff was not paid the price of tin works by C, and thus the buyer was suspended without proceeding the tin construction work.