1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 29,50,000 and Defendant B with respect thereto from June 4, 2016, and Defendant C with respect to the said amount.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff awarded a contract with Defendant B for the construction period of D New Housing Construction Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”) from June 11, 2015 to September 20, 2015, with the construction cost of KRW 130 million, and Defendant C affixed a seal as the contractor.

B. The Plaintiff paid to Defendant C the construction cost of KRW 39 million on June 11, 2015, and KRW 10 million on October 23, 2015, respectively.

C. Defendant B failed to complete the instant construction work, and the Plaintiff was responsible for the follow-up construction work to another construction business entity and carried out the instant construction work.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion was suspended, the construction cost was calculated at KRW 27,790,020 for the part that the Defendants performed, and KRW 20,604,90 for the other part, and KRW 24,197,460 for the average of them.

The Defendants shall refund the difference between the construction cost and the above construction cost from the construction cost already paid by the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 19.5 million, which is 50% of the total amount of KRW 39 million under the construction contract, if the Defendants are unable to complete the construction by the date of completion of the contract.

Therefore, against the Defendants, the Defendants seek payment of KRW 24,802,540,00 (= KRW 49,000 - KRW 24,197,460), which is the part of the construction cost already paid, and KRW 44,302,540,00 ( KRW 24,802,540, KRW 19,550,000), which is the aggregate of KRW 18,50,00,00 for damages.

B. Defendant C’s assertion that this case’s construction work had been carried out considerable of KRW 39 million, and only the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. First, as to the assertion on the assertion of the origin of the case, the Plaintiff’s No. 3-1 and No. 2, which is a written estimate submitted by the Plaintiff, are not a statement or estimate presented by the Defendant B prior to entering into a contract with the Defendant B, but a statement or estimate presented by the Plaintiff.