1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 27,50,000 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from November 11, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 (including each serial number, if any) as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff is a corporation operating wholesale and retail business such as electric equipment. Upon the defendant's request from the defendant from April 15, 2013 to December 14 of the same year, it is recognized that the plaintiff provided electric equipment and appliances necessary for the electrical construction and the electrical construction of a meal station in the Gangnam-gu High Dormitory, which is executed by the defendant to the defendant from April 15, 2013 to December 14 of the same year, and the defendant paid part of the price of the above electric equipment and appliances to the plaintiff via B of the above construction, and the remainder of the price of the goods remaining after the payment

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 27,500,000 won and damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 11, 2014 to the day of full payment, as the plaintiff seeks.

2. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim since the defendant settled all the construction cost including the price of the plaintiff's goods asserted against B. Thus, the defendant's defense against this cannot be asserted. Thus, even if the defendant paid all the price of the plaintiff's goods to B according to the plaintiff's assertion, it cannot be viewed that B had the right to receive the plaintiff's goods payment. Thus, the defendant's defense against the plaintiff cannot be viewed as having paid all the price of the goods to the plaintiff. Thus, there is no other evidence to acknowledge the defendant's payment.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.